Jes Sorensen <jes.soren...@redhat.com> writes: > On 01/24/11 18:28, Stefan Weil wrote: >> There was some discussion regarding this patch set. >> I agree with Markus that part of the first patch >> should be removed: don't change char to unsigned char. > > The unsigned char should definitely go in, leaving it as a signed char > doesn't serve any purpose.
Leaving something as is doesn't need justification. Changing it does. The justification presented so far was "it is prettier to match the real behavior of pure toupper()". Which I don't buy. But without commit access, I'm not a buyer. [...]
