From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Eli Zaretskii" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: unibyte<->multibyte conversion [Re: Emacs-diffs Digest, Vol 2, Issue 28] Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 20:48:22 +0300 Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Message-ID: <2561-Thu23Jan2003204821+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il> References: <3405-Sat18Jan2003154003+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il> <200301200229.LAA16287@etlken.m17n.org> <6480-Mon20Jan2003214849+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il> <200301202055.h0KKtun11691@rum.cs.yale.edu> <200301221412.h0MECoA01024@rum.cs.yale.edu> <8011-Wed22Jan2003210918+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1043347857 28834 80.91.224.249 (23 Jan 2003 18:50:57 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 18:50:57 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 18bmQZ-0007T4-00 for ; Thu, 23 Jan 2003 19:50:15 +0100 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 18bmSw-00022J-00 for ; Thu, 23 Jan 2003 19:52:43 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13) id 18bmRo-0005wa-01 for emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org; Thu, 23 Jan 2003 13:51:32 -0500 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10.13) id 18bmRJ-0005ZW-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 23 Jan 2003 13:51:01 -0500 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10.13) id 18bmQt-0004o9-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 23 Jan 2003 13:50:42 -0500 Original-Received: from gandalf.inter.net.il ([192.114.186.22]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13) id 18bmQX-00045p-00; Thu, 23 Jan 2003 13:50:14 -0500 Original-Received: from zaretsky ([80.230.234.246]) by gandalf.inter.net.il (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.2.2-GA) with ESMTP id ADP76226; Thu, 23 Jan 2003 20:50:11 +0200 (IST) Original-To: rms@gnu.org X-Mailer: emacs 21.3.50 (via feedmail 8 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9 In-reply-to: (message from Richard Stallman on Thu, 23 Jan 2003 06:38:17 -0500) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1b5 Precedence: list List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:11012 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:11012 > From: Richard Stallman > Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 06:38:17 -0500 > > These functions, per se, are straightforward--but would the difference > between the various proposed coding systems be equally > straightforward? I'm not sure what are you asking. If you are concerned that people would not grasp the effects of encoding/decoding text with ``obscure'' coding systems like no-conversion and raw-text, then I agree with Stefan: these conversions are well-defined and can be understood upon careful reading. (If the current docs doesn't do a good job explaining those coding systems, we could improve that.) The important point, to me, is that using en/decode-coding-*, you know _exactly_ what will happen, since you specify the encoding. The string-*-uni/multibyte functions, by contrast, make complicated decisions about the encoding, so you need to memorize those decisions to use the functions in a predictable manner. I find myself unable to remember that; perhaps it's just me and my failing memory.