text in fields (CR/LF, CR, LF) which is correct?

[Dar Scott]

On Saturday, August 31, 2002, at 11:03 AM, J. Landman Gay wrote:

> For example, in Kee's problem, I'd think that this would work okay:
>
>   get data from database, put it in a variable
>   replace database line endings with returns in the variable
>   put variable into a field
>
> It seems to me that the above would convert all line endings to 
> machine-specific line endings without any manual manipulation, and 
> would go cross-platform without any changes. When the data needs 
> to go back to the database:
>
>   put the field text into a variable
>   replace returns with database-specific line endings
>   send variable back to the database
>
> What am I missing? Doesn't this work?

Yes, with the caveat that "return" here means the Rev constant 
"return" and not the more common meaning of ASCII Carriage Return, 
numToChar(13).

This also has the advantage of addressing the complementary problem 
of writing back to the DB.

However, this requires that one know the "database-specific line 
endings" beforehand and adapt should they change (over time, or 
across platforms or DB).  Of course, if there is a requirement to 
write back out to the DB then it must be used.  Also, this does not 
address the general foreign file or stream or message or clipboard 
concern in cases where Rev text I/O does not work or does not 
apply.  Also, it might not be robust in handling variations.

The Modified Nethery Function is shown below:

function adjustedLineEndInput thetext
    replace (numtochar(13) & numtochar(10)) with numtochar(13) in thetext
    replace numtochar(13) with numtochar(10) in thetext
    return thetext
end adjustedLineEndInput

Takes text from almost any environment and converts it to internal 
Rev text.

The word "Input" is in the name to emphasize that it only does half 
of what Jacqueline's scheme does.  (If lineEnd were a constant, the 
function could use that for numToChar(10) in the second replace.  
If asciiCR and asciiLF were constants, they could be used in the 
rest of the function.)

This does two replaces and Jacqueline's does one.  I don't think 
one more replace is a high price.

(The Modified Nethery Function beats the function I had been using 
which had three replaces, but does the same thing.)

Dar Scott