Page 2 of 2

Posted: 2006-11-29, 16:08 UTC
by ghisler(Author)
why not having \n or reuse \r such syntax
Simple: These parameters were added in a later TC version than the original command. If I used \n, tools using that parameter would no longer work with older TC versions...

Posted: 2006-11-30, 06:59 UTC
by nsp
ghisler(Author) wrote:
why not having \n or reuse \r such syntax
Simple: These parameters were added in a later TC version than the original command. If I used \n, tools using that parameter would no longer work with older TC versions...
I wasn't aware of this before some week ago !

This is a good point for who want to operate with TC from 6.5x to 7.zzz, a compromise could be to have \0 and \n or \r operate _from TC7._
In this case you preserve old external tool compatibility with TC7 and allow future tools to operate with the newest syntax and he newest TC....