Merged
Conversation
Upon review of Parsers.Options validations ([ref](JuliaData/Parsers.jl#152)), @nickrobinson251, @Drvi, and I agree that this shouldn't be valid. The problem is that there's an ambiguity in the case of a _missing_ field vs. an empty quoted field vs. a quoted field with newlines. For example: ```julia a"b"c 1"2"3 # normal row "2"3 # 1st field is missing, but ambiguous with 1st field as quoted `"2"` "1""2"3 # Also ambiguous because the 2nd quote escapes the 3rd, so value is `1"2` ```
Drvi
approved these changes
Jan 4, 2023
Collaborator
nickrobinson251
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How do you want to release this? i suppose technically it is breaking but given the unintended and undesirable ambiguities that results i suppose we could consider it a bug that this was ever allowed?
| @test f.rows == 0 | ||
|
|
||
| # delim same as quotechar | ||
| f = CSV.File(IOBuffer("a\"b\n1\"2\n"); delim='"') |
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
can we replace these with an @test_throws test?
Member
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd rather have the tests in the Parsers.jl package where we do the validation checks
Member
Author
Yeah, I think we have to treat it as a bug. |
quinnj
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 12, 2026
Upon review of Parsers.Options validations ([ref](JuliaData/Parsers.jl#152)), @nickrobinson251, @Drvi, and I agree that this shouldn't be valid. The problem is that there's an ambiguity in the case of a _missing_ field vs. an empty quoted field vs. a quoted field with newlines. For example: ```julia a"b"c 1"2"3 # normal row "2"3 # 1st field is missing, but ambiguous with 1st field as quoted `"2"` "1""2"3 # Also ambiguous because the 2nd quote escapes the 3rd, so value is `1"2` ```
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Upon review of Parsers.Options validations (ref), @nickrobinson251, @Drvi, and I agree that this shouldn't be valid. The problem is that there's an ambiguity in the case of a missing field vs. an empty quoted field vs. a quoted field with newlines. For example: