Re:CSVs Are Kinda Bad. DSVs Are Kinda Good
by zekica on Wednesday August 14, 2024 @07:06AM
(#41244739)
No, all UTF-8 multi-byte encodings have the most significant bit set.
Re:CSVs Are Kinda Bad. DSVs Are Kinda Good
by boomlinde on Wednesday August 14, 2024 @07:24AM
(#41244862)
> The author seems to ignore the fact that CSV got so popular because it is human readable.
It might seem that way if you didn't actually read the article:
> So what’s the downside? This custom FEC tooling might give you a hint.
> For starters, it’s rather unreadable when opened in a text editor.
Re:CSVs Are Kinda Bad. DSVs Are Kinda Good
by postalrat on Wednesday August 14, 2024 @06:34PM
(#41251243)
I'd say CSVs stuck around because there weren't any other alternatives that could be easily created, appended to, read by different apps.
Re:CSVs Are Kinda Bad. DSVs Are Kinda Good
by tpoacher on Thursday August 15, 2024 @03:42AM
(#41253869)
CSV's aren't really readable either though. They're "inspectable", but that's different. So if you want to read them you'll need to either use specific software, or do some preprocessing to align things properly etc ... in which case the extra step of performing a file-wide substitution of the record separator with newlines and unit separator with tabs or sth, isn't a much worse problem.
Also, I’m on a mobile right now, so can’t verify that, but it seems the format is flawed. The reader decodes UTF8 strings after splitting the binary buffer by the delimiter, but I believe the delimiter may be a part of a UTF8 character.
Edit: just checked and there’s actually no chance that the delimiter the author chose would be part of UTF8 encoding of any other character than the delimiter itself