From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?Q?Mattias_Engdeg=C3=A5rd?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: master 64e25cd: More robust NS hex colour string parsing Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2020 21:00:10 +0200 Message-ID: <3C92A091-F389-4179-B2F0-B3AA5ABD6CCE@acm.org> References: <20200608120746.30163.87810@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <20200608120747.80E8E20A2E@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <83r1uk429y.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.14\)) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="56277"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: pipcet@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Jun 12 21:01:09 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1jjovN-000EZ6-MC for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 12 Jun 2020 21:01:09 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:40610 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jjovM-0008Ix-MS for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 12 Jun 2020 15:01:08 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:53846) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jjoub-0007Na-3w for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Jun 2020 15:00:21 -0400 Original-Received: from mail157c50.megamailservers.eu ([91.136.10.167]:43202 helo=mail51c50.megamailservers.eu) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jjouX-0006RK-9b; Fri, 12 Jun 2020 15:00:20 -0400 X-Authenticated-User: mattiase@bredband.net DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=megamailservers.eu; s=maildub; t=1591988413; bh=AaDA2UFqndkVt5oPO3E4q+pEmerXj0ZVXavhn0aHfDE=; h=Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To:From; b=pBIz5tDsU6Vv7gez+ojPXvtpVgaQnGnIreLPofWSImzCOPhzC68OExETuGr2TU8F+ b9rlEWBOB9pLRX1tHRJF4PJCieCiA8Xm/YzQ5llvGtqs2qqrkyX2ybBkoITDJrxu9Q NJXolSEL/N0qVbSfIPgoz+Xh4a8dxf8Xab2x8QQE= Feedback-ID: mattiase@acm.or Original-Received: from [192.168.0.4] (c188-150-171-71.bredband.comhem.se [188.150.171.71]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail51c50.megamailservers.eu (8.14.9/8.13.1) with ESMTP id 05CJ0BO3030040; Fri, 12 Jun 2020 19:00:13 +0000 In-Reply-To: <83r1uk429y.fsf@gnu.org> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.14) X-CTCH-RefID: str=0001.0A782F26.5EE3D05A.0018, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0 X-CTCH-VOD: Unknown X-CTCH-Spam: Unknown X-CTCH-Score: 0.000 X-CTCH-Flags: 0 X-CTCH-ScoreCust: 0.000 X-CSC: 0 X-CHA: v=2.3 cv=MOMeZ/Rl c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=SF+I6pRkHZhrawxbOkkvaA==:117 a=SF+I6pRkHZhrawxbOkkvaA==:17 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=M51BFTxLslgA:10 a=mDV3o1hIAAAA:8 a=rBoHcYwisWiZEQPK3xgA:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=_FVE-zBwftR9WsbkzFJk:22 Received-SPF: softfail client-ip=91.136.10.167; envelope-from=mattiase@acm.org; helo=mail51c50.megamailservers.eu X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/06/12 15:00:14 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 2.2.x-3.x (no timestamps) [generic] X-Spam_score_int: -11 X-Spam_score: -1.2 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.2 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665 autolearn=_AUTOLEARN X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:252144 Archived-At: 12 juni 2020 kl. 19.33 skrev Eli Zaretskii : > Were the 4 versions identical or different? If the latter, what were > the differences, and which of the features that call them will from > now on behave differently? They were not semantically equivalent but clearly intended to be. Only = the X and Windows versions accepted the rgbi: format; most if not all = had bad error-checking (simple typos silently giving nonsense values), = and the Windows version appears to have normalised incorrectly in some = cases (this is from reading the code with no Windows machine handy). The new code should parse a superset of what the old code did, detect = more mistakes, and be as accurate as we can make it.