Re: Talk about glibc locale format
On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 02:01:39AM +0200, Keld Jørn Simonsen wrote:
> As far as I can tell, LC_TIME *is* backwards compatible, in the sense
> that conforming POSIX specs will be valid and work as intended with
> 14652 semantics.
> But if there is added functionality, then you need added support.
> This is also true for the extensions eg in LC_COLLATE which cannot be
> handled with POSIX. In general one cannot expect that at 14652 locale
> can be handled by POSIX. However the other way around should work
> without any problems, a valid POSIX locale should work unchanged, and as
> intended in POSIX, with the 14652 semantics. That is my definition of
> backwards compatibility, and what we tried hard to assure was
> accomplished in 14652.
Programers use nl_langinfo() to access to locale information, but they
have no standard way to determine if nl_langinfo(DAY_1) refers to Sunday
or Monday. Moreover all existing cal-like programs get instantly broken
if nl_langinfo(DAY_1) becomes Monday instead of Sunday, which is why I
am stating that ISO 14652 is breaking compatibility, not adding
It would IMHO have been much better to define new keywords when
POSIX definitions are altered in such an incompatible way.