From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#27525: 25.1; Line wrapping of bidi paragraphs Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2017 20:24:26 +0300 Message-ID: <83tw28bar9.fsf@gnu.org> References: <8337abobuz.fsf@gnu.org> <87eftpa30a.fsf@blei.turtle-trading.net> <83a84djweb.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1500485124 11747 195.159.176.226 (19 Jul 2017 17:25:24 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2017 17:25:24 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 27525@debbugs.gnu.org To: Itai Berli Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jul 19 19:25:14 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dXsil-0002G5-5V for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 19:25:11 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:34369 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dXsin-0002Uq-GW for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 13:25:13 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:40067) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dXsif-0002Ug-7s for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 13:25:06 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dXsic-0003fK-0f for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 13:25:05 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:45379) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dXsib-0003fF-Tc for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 13:25:01 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dXsib-000826-O5 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 13:25:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2017 17:25:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 27525 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 27525-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B27525.150048509530861 (code B ref 27525); Wed, 19 Jul 2017 17:25:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 27525) by debbugs.gnu.org; 19 Jul 2017 17:24:55 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48056 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dXsiU-00081h-Ol for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 13:24:54 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:49047) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dXsiT-00081V-8u for 27525@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 13:24:53 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dXsiK-0003as-UK for 27525@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 13:24:48 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:45476) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dXsiK-0003ao-R2; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 13:24:44 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:2218 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1dXsiJ-00013U-Bs; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 13:24:44 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from Itai Berli on Wed, 19 Jul 2017 11:50:54 +0300) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 208.118.235.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:134750 Archived-At: > From: Itai Berli > Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2017 11:50:54 +0300 > > Eli, in different bug report, namely 27526, I recently wrote the following remark: > > > the line-wrapping bug is still a major annoyance, at best, and until it is fixed, Emacs cannot claim to be > Unicode compliant. > > to which you replied: > > > I disagree, as I already said many times. > > You do agree, though, that Emacs does not conform to the Unicode Bidirectional Algorithm as specified in the > Unicode Standard Annex #9. I maintain that Emacs deviates from the UBA in a relatively minor way, in an aspect that is only tangentially related to reordering bidirectional text for display, and that raises its head in situations that are relatively rare in practice, and in many of those rare cases can be easily worked around by breaking long lines. > So the only thing you disagree with me is that non-conformance to the Unicode Bidirectional Algorithm is > tantamount to non-conformance to the Unicode Standard. Not only, see above. > Well, this disagreement is easily settled by reading > article C12 'Bidirectional Text' of section 3.2 'Conformance Requirements' of the Unicode Standard: No, it is not settled; see above. And I don't really understand what is the purpose of your insistence on the formal definition of this deviation. It certainly won't help fixing this issue any time soon, not unless someone steps forward to do the job, which IMO is quite large. All it does is cause me to think, for the first time in many years, whether I indeed had to invest all that huge amount of time and energy in single-handedly coding, testing, and debugging the bidirectional text support for Emacs, which even today, 10 years later, still shines among all the bidi-aware editors out there, certainly among those of the Free Software variety. Even the fribidi library didn't yet catch up with Unicode 6.3 and later. If after all that all I get is this badgering about a minor issue whose solution needs a thorough rewrite of the related code, then I wish I never wasted those efforts working on a feature which I naïvely assumed will be tremendously useful to many, and that in fact causes only negative reactions from the few who use it.