I see there are #CR and #CR$ constants and I'm assuming they're BOTH carriage-returns ... but there's only a #CRLF$ carriage-return-linefeed constant ... shouldn't there also be a corresponding #CRLF ?
Should the #CR$ and #CRLF$ be removed for PB4? Are they antiquated?
#CRLF and #CRLF$ ?
Re: #CRLF and #CRLF$ ?
> Should the #CR$ and #CRLF$ be removed for PB4?
What?
You requested them yourself.
See bottom of:
http://www.purebasic.fr/english/viewtop ... 9&start=15
Anyway, no -- they should stay. They were requested by others in the past,
at the start of the link above. I use them every day, as do others. And why
would we want to type Chr(13)+Chr(10) instead of just #CRLF$?
What?


http://www.purebasic.fr/english/viewtop ... 9&start=15
Anyway, no -- they should stay. They were requested by others in the past,
at the start of the link above. I use them every day, as do others. And why
would we want to type Chr(13)+Chr(10) instead of just #CRLF$?

I compile using 5.31 (x86) on Win 7 Ultimate (64-bit).
"PureBasic won't be object oriented, period" - Fred.
"PureBasic won't be object oriented, period" - Fred.