Re: Alternative to hash-bang

[Thomas Klausner <wiz%NetBSD.org@localhost>]

On Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 03:36:48PM +0200, Steffen Nurpmeso wrote:
> How about supporting the more-and-more common Unicode
> Byte-Order-Mark for UTF-8 encoded shell scripts?

As wikipedia says:

The Unicode Standard permits the BOM in UTF-8,[2] but does not require
or recommend its use.[3]

[2] "The Unicode Standard 5.0, Chapter 2:General Structure" (PDF). p. 36. 
Retrieved 2009-03-29. "Table 2-4. The Seven Unicode Encoding Schemes"

[3] "The Unicode Standard 5.0, Chapter 2:General Structure" (PDF). p. 36. 
Retrieved 2008-11-30. "Use of a BOM is neither required nor recommended for 
UTF-8, but may be encountered in contexts where UTF-8 data is converted from 
other encoding forms that use a BOM or where the BOM is used as a UTF-8 
signature"

 Thomas