Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

Stefan Monnier writes:

 > > What I proposed was a more generic concept where use of signatures and
 > > the EOL convention would (at least to the user) appear as buffer-local
 > > variables.

Note the *at least to the user*.

 > [For EOLs], I disagree: EOL processing definitely need to take
 > place when talking to subprocesses,

Yes, it has to *take place* when talking to subprocesses, but I don't
see why it should be controlled by proliferation of (user-visible)
coding systems.