Re: [Emacs-diffs] master 9ce1d38: Use curved quotes in core elisp diagnostics

[Paul Eggert <eggert@cs.ucla.edu>]

On 08/24/2015 01:20 PM, Richard Stallman wrote:
> We could let the first argument to 'format'
> be a symbol that specifies how to transform the format string.

Something like that could work, yes.  For example, instead of the 
current master's:

   (format-message FORMAT ARGS)

we could have:

   (format 'message FORMAT ARGS)

where 'message means "Format appropriately for message functions" and 
translates curved quotes to the user's preferred style.  We can add 
support for other symbols or lists of symbols in place of 'message.

format-message does have an advantage, though: it simplifies 
backward-compatibility implementation.  For example, code intended to 
work reasonably well in older Emacs can do this:

   (unless (fboundp 'format-message) (defalias 'format-message 'format))

and doing this sort of thing would be somewhat trickier with (format 
'message ...).  So perhaps we should keep the (format-message ...) 
convenience function even if we also add (format 'message ...).

> curly quotes and other non-ASCII characters in comments within Emacs ... [provide] no_practical_  benefit to anyone.

This doesn't match my experience.  In the past few weeks I've edited 
hundreds of diagnostics and docstrings in Elisp files, and in my 
environment curved quotes are significantly more practical than %< and 
%> would be.  With %< and %>, I'd have to hit three or four keys to type 
a quote, and the digraphs would make it harder to quickly judge string 
length and alignment.  In my environment curved quotes are also 
significantly better in strings than grave accent and apostrophe, as I 
can type curved quotes with single unshifted keystrokes, as compared to 
having to hit three keys to type either grave accent or apostrophe.  
Emacs should support environments that make curved quotes this easy; it 
shouldn't fight against them.

Perhaps for other users and other environments %< and %> are better, and 
so it'd be OK to add support for %< and %> in format strings, and I can 
volunteer to do that if you think it'd be helpful.  However, Emacs 
shouldn't *force* people to use %< and %> to get this functionality: 
there should be an easy way to quote intuitively, with quote characters 
standing for themselves in typical usage.