From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#20140: 24.4; M17n shaper output rejected Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2022 16:40:09 +0200 Message-ID: <83wnhw2nxy.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20150318222040.4066e6e9@JRWUBU2> <87r18jk5nr.fsf@gnus.org> <83v8xv2icg.fsf@gnu.org> <20220205225251.08a0faab@JRWUBU2> <83sfsmpmxb.fsf@gnu.org> <20220213211152.03e2990a@JRWUBU2> <83leydpok0.fsf@gnu.org> <20220214232623.30534d5a@JRWUBU2> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="40518"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: 20140@debbugs.gnu.org, larsi@gnus.org To: Richard Wordingham Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Feb 15 15:41:31 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1nJz1G-000AKw-Mr for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 15 Feb 2022 15:41:30 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:57558 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nJz1E-00039I-VN for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 15 Feb 2022 09:41:28 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:51118) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nJz0p-000394-HT for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 15 Feb 2022 09:41:04 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:50046) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nJz0o-0001ZR-1V for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 15 Feb 2022 09:41:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1nJz0o-0005kK-0H for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 15 Feb 2022 09:41:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2022 14:41:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 20140 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: moreinfo Original-Received: via spool by 20140-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B20140.164493601922022 (code B ref 20140); Tue, 15 Feb 2022 14:41:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 20140) by debbugs.gnu.org; 15 Feb 2022 14:40:19 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43943 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1nJz03-0005j2-KH for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 15 Feb 2022 09:40:19 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:44280) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1nJz01-0005il-HB for 20140@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 15 Feb 2022 09:40:14 -0500 Original-Received: from [2001:470:142:3::e] (port=58040 helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nJyzv-0001Gh-C9; Tue, 15 Feb 2022 09:40:07 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-version:References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From: Date; bh=yDlsfD+ljssArNG2A6yanwmUnfYIggcBv9VCrvGLSAE=; b=Nu2tEHYqao26NLgJlKA/ k9hDGERFhjnTPF5La8/Nz4jurcz7bE/XhONe1cw2tYKDhUGmv+uDTGVIH8P/Y0tlDn0tpEmmvCBHb dmtsO7jp3baIdqgcL7+3+1dBmIcuJ/QVc2KxcOoXIgfLxjAyj/fABFWC7IIWGXAi6YzOhk5JPFM1n c4oVtlYRp+mQQl3V77pP2IaMdC1haSfO5TB3KFgIEKJYM+tEXovEjOwDPTkb86F2f3GhzRB4bwUFj k05NiIFjAuYHXuex8nUgXcXPlJ5C9zSA/fIlzMN3QGkoo44smiQzXMe7GenZuzgw+lE5/EO43WnAV AAJBDSLr61qwWA==; Original-Received: from [87.69.77.57] (port=2801 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nJyzu-00054y-Sy; Tue, 15 Feb 2022 09:40:07 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20220214232623.30534d5a@JRWUBU2> (message from Richard Wordingham on Mon, 14 Feb 2022 23:26:23 +0000) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:226991 Archived-At: > Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2022 23:26:23 +0000 > From: Richard Wordingham > Cc: larsi@gnus.org, 20140@debbugs.gnu.org > > > No, that's not true. I'm not aware of any such limitation; AFAIK > > Arabic shaping works correctly in Emacs, certainly with HarfBuzz and > > Emacs 27 or later. > > > > Or maybe I misunderstand what you mean by "typewriter-like" fonts? > > Can you give an example of a non-typewriter-like font for Arabic that > > I can find on MS-Windows and try? > > Not off the top of my head, but compare لحج with the presentation form > ‎ﳊ U+FCCA ARABIC LIGATURE LAM WITH HAH INITIAL FORM for the first two > letters. The lam part is a vertical line in the middle of the glyph; > the 'hah' part forms the lower part of the glyph. They look identical here (using the default Courier New font). With what font did you think they will look wrong?