any reason to *not* support hex escapes?

[Rich Felker]

On Sun, Jul 02, 2006 at 12:34:00PM -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> On Sun, 2 Jul 2006, Bernhard Fischer wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, Jul 02, 2006 at 11:36:12AM -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> > >
> > >libbb/process_escape_sequence.c:
> > >--------------------------------
> > >
> > >#define WANT_HEX_ESCAPES 1
> > >...
> > >#ifdef WANT_HEX_ESCAPES ...
> > >
> > >etc etc.
> > >
> > >  any reason to not support this feature unconditionally?
> >
> > libbb/Config.in ?
> >
> > Not sure if these are worth exposing in the menu-thing. Leaving them
> > in the file so one can hand-tweak if needed is about as good for me
> > but admittedly limits the number of people who may turn it off if
> > they know that they will not need it.
> 
> but is there any obvious reason why someone would explicitly *not*
> want that feature in the first place?

Yes, so nonportable scripts will fail rather than silently working and
thus can be found/fixed when GNU users add GNU crap to them. :)

Rich