Escape codes are not 100% portable

[Steven Schveighoffer via Digitalmars-d]

On 4/2/15 9:05 AM, Jens Bauer wrote:
> On Thursday, 2 April 2015 at 12:24:22 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
>> On Thursday, 2 April 2015 at 11:42:50 UTC, Jens Bauer wrote:
>>> On the other hand, if a file was copied to a platform, where \r = 13
>>> and \n = 10, and the file contains lines ending in 0x0d, then this
>>> compiler would not be able to build the file.
>>
>> Where it will fail? It can see extra lines, but those are whitespace,
>> the source should compile just fine.
>
> You're right here; because the D compiler does not require reading
> line-by-line.
> The line numbers reported will be incorrect, but that's probably the
> worst that can happen.
>
> However, in a case like PPM (Portable Pixmap Format), the problem is
> that when the first \n character is met, the format switches to binary;
> but that will not occur until we've already read a bunch of bytes from
> the binary stream, resulting in the picture being out of sync.

After reading all this thread, I can safely say, I'm OK with D not 
targeting these platforms.

In addition, "Not portable" doesn't mean "buildable without any changes".

Is it not considered a porting activity to just change those constants 
for that version of DMD?

And finally, if the files are written for that platform, won't they have 
this wonky coding anyway? And if they are files from another platform 
which treats \n and \r traditionally, won't editors on that platform do 
the same thing with line numbers? I really see no problem with the way 
the code is.

-Steve