From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: quimby.gnus.org!not-for-mail From: "Stefan Monnier" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [simon.marshall@misys.com: FW: [21.1.90]: should coding be recalculated on revert-buffer?] Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2002 02:24:30 -0500 Message-ID: <200202250724.g1P7OVR14692@rum.cs.yale.edu> References: <200202250701.QAA01581@etlken.m17n.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: quimby2.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: quimby2.netfonds.no 1014622212 28464 195.204.10.66 (25 Feb 2002 07:30:12 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@quimby2.netfonds.no NNTP-Posting-Date: 25 Feb 2002 07:30:12 GMT Cc: rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by quimby2.netfonds.no with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 16fFaO-0007P0-00 for ; Mon, 25 Feb 2002 08:30:12 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 16fFXW-0005uY-00; Mon, 25 Feb 2002 02:27:14 -0500 Original-Received: from rum.cs.yale.edu ([128.36.229.169]) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 16fFUx-0005in-00; Mon, 25 Feb 2002 02:24:35 -0500 Original-Received: (from monnier@localhost) by rum.cs.yale.edu (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g1P7OVR14692; Mon, 25 Feb 2002 02:24:31 -0500 X-Mailer: exmh version 2.4 06/23/2000 with nmh-1.0.4 Original-To: Kenichi Handa Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.5 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: quimby.gnus.org gmane.emacs.devel:1508 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:1508 > Richard Stallman writes: > > I tend to think he is right. What do you think? > [...] > > From: "Marshall, Simon" > > To: "'Emacs Pretest Bug'" > > Subject: FW: [21.1.90]: should coding be recalculated on revert-buffer? > > Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2002 15:09:45 -0000 > [...] > > If I visit a DOS-format file in Emacs on a Unix box, Emacs helpfully > > tells me the coding system is DOS in the modeline. If I use dos2unix > > in a shell to convert it and M-x revert-buffer in Emacs, Emacs still > > tells me the coding system is DOS. > > > Shouldn't it revert the coding system as appropriate too? > > In the above specific case, I agree he is right. > > But, if one visited a file with C-x RET c CODING RET C-x C-f > FILENAME RET, it usually means that the file encoding is > different from what Emacs automatically detects. Thus, in > such a case, we had better read the file with the same > coding system (i.e. CODING). > > And, it's difficult to distinguish the above two cases. Looks like we should remember whether the current coding-system was automatically inferred or whether it was explicitly specified. Of course, we need to remember it separatly for the line-ending part of the coding-system. Stefan _______________________________________________ Emacs-devel mailing list Emacs-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel