From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: libnettle/libhogweed WIP Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2017 18:31:46 +0300 Message-ID: <8360i0ct25.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83a89gq3us.fsf@gnu.org> <87bmtjiv0w.fsf_-_@lifelogs.com> <83o9xjn06c.fsf@gnu.org> <87shmeb5ln.fsf_-_@lifelogs.com> <83y3w5z1ez.fsf@gnu.org> <87lgr6yakj.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87wpamww9k.fsf@lifelogs.com> <8337daggnj.fsf@gnu.org> <87d1cdwxt6.fsf@lifelogs.com> <83tw5pg1q3.fsf@gnu.org> <87zifhulc2.fsf@lifelogs.com> <83h91og80k.fsf@gnu.org> <87pogbuhoe.fsf@lifelogs.com> <834lxndmd9.fsf@gnu.org> <87efwrug6z.fsf@lifelogs.com> <83bmrscvdb.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1492615922 2001 195.159.176.226 (19 Apr 2017 15:32:02 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2017 15:32:02 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Apr 19 17:31:57 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1d0raH-0000PI-Hn for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 19 Apr 2017 17:31:57 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48896 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d0raN-0000ul-BW for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 19 Apr 2017 11:32:03 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:55830) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d0rZZ-0000uW-5c for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Apr 2017 11:31:14 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d0rZV-0000Yh-5M for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Apr 2017 11:31:13 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:48419) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d0rZV-0000YT-0a; Wed, 19 Apr 2017 11:31:09 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:1614 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1d0rZU-0001cy-91; Wed, 19 Apr 2017 11:31:08 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from Stefan Monnier on Wed, 19 Apr 2017 10:54:55 -0400) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:214128 Archived-At: > From: Stefan Monnier > Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2017 10:54:55 -0400 > > Indeed, in some cases we might want to work on multibyte text without > encoding it at all. Maybe we could have an argument specifying that the > caller intends to operate on the internal encoding. Yes, could be. > But what shouldn't be in those functions is encoding/decoding: if > encoding/decoding is needed, then it should be done before/after calling > the functions. But if we pass buffer text, we could always encode using buffer-file-coding-system, and IMO that would be the expected result (provided that the user didn't want to use the internal representation). We do this in the likes of write-region, so why not here?