Re: [PATCH v10 7/9] convert: check for detectable errors in UTF encodings

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Mar 7, 2018, 22:57 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqvae7xznk.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>
In-Reply-To: <766B302C-446B-4730-A5D9-909C6FCF6A84@gmail.com>

Lars Schneider <larsxschneider@gmail.com> writes:

> In the case of has_prohibited_utf_bom() you are right as we are 
> dropping the BE/LE suffix in the advise. However, look at the 
> is_missing_required_utf_bom() advise. Here we *add* BE/LE.

So? Then add BE/LE like "Utf-16BE" or "utf16BE". You do not have enough information to decide what is best for the user anyway (which is why I am not convinced that it is even a good idea to always upcase in the first place).

> At this point I thought it would make sense to make the advised
> encoding name uppercase in both situations. OK with you?

In the endgame, if upcased and properly dashed form is always used, that would be good (if we are enforcing the policy, which I am not onboard 100% but it's your code and I do not care too strongly about it). I do not see much point in an interim step that only upcases without doing the dash insertion.