pon., 16 gru 2019 o 10:58 George Peter Banyard napisał(a):
> Greetings internals,
>
> I'm here to get internals's opinion about allowing a string offset to be
> replaced with arbitrary strings.
>
> Since forever strings with more then one byte have been truncated silently
> to one byte. The case
> Le 16 déc. 2019 à 10:58, George Peter Banyard a écrit :
>
> Greetings internals,
>
> I'm here to get internals's opinion about allowing a string offset to be
> replaced with arbitrary strings.
>
> Since forever strings with more then one byte have been truncated silently
> to one byte. The
On 16.12.19 10:27, Nikita Popov wrote:
On Mon, Dec 16, 2019 at 10:19 AM Dennis Birkholz
wrote:
On 12.12.19 18:13, Nikita Popov wrote:
On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 12:03 PM Dennis Birkholz <
p...@dennis.birkholz.biz>
wrote:
But my just want to repeat my main concern: buildin
data structures that
Greetings internals,
I'm here to get internals's opinion about allowing a string offset to be
replaced with arbitrary strings.
Since forever strings with more then one byte have been truncated silently
to one byte. The case with empty string *kinda* was existent but had a
buggy behaviour (see bug
On Mon, Dec 16, 2019 at 10:19 AM Dennis Birkholz
wrote:
> On 12.12.19 18:13, Nikita Popov wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 12:03 PM Dennis Birkholz <
> p...@dennis.birkholz.biz>
> > wrote:
> >> But my just want to repeat my main concern: buildin
> >> data structures that are not serializable ar
On 12.12.19 18:13, Nikita Popov wrote:
On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 12:03 PM Dennis Birkholz
wrote:
But my just want to repeat my main concern: buildin
data structures that are not serializable are a real problem for users
that use serialization extensively. Maybe the solution to that problem
is a m
