UseBOMForUnicodeEncodedFile - Still necessary?

[RamblingCookieMonster]

Hiyo!

I won't pretend to know anything about encoding, but noticed this RFC draft was accepted a while back. Is there a need for UseBOMForUnicodeEncodedFile, given the RFC, or even without the RFC?

To clarify - is there any benefit to this rule? What breaks if there is no BOM? We know for sure that things break in the xplat world when there is a BOM (i.e. this rule passes), which seems a bit off.

Cheers!

[kapilmb]

It appears the rule was created to address issue #293.

Maybe we need a xplat rule that errors out if a file has BOM marker, but then it would work against the UseBOMForUnicodeEncodedFile rule. One approach to avoid such conflicting diagnosis would be to make these two rules part of different rule sets?

[bergmeister]

I think we should not include the rule in the set of default rules any more but still leave the rule there.

[felixfbecker]

Would be great to have an option to enforce no BOM since many *nix applications choke on it.

[bergmeister]

Since there are so many scenarios, I think the rule should be changed to be customizable so that the expected encoding is just a setting and possibly not even have a default at all.