From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Line wrap reconsidered Date: Fri, 29 May 2020 10:17:44 +0300 Message-ID: <83o8q7qkfb.fsf@gnu.org> References: <92FF4412-04FB-4521-B6CE-52B08526E4E5@gmail.com> <878shfsq35.fsf@gnus.org> <83imgivjak.fsf@gnu.org> <83lfletr03.fsf@gnu.org> <4895C6EE-5E1F-44BF-93C1-CC5F7C096F73@gmail.com> <9766BA3D-B8F9-456B-9F59-60D21B86E390@gmail.com> <83sgfls2ul.fsf@gnu.org> <83v9kgq6jy.fsf@gnu.org> <5E75D1E2-8BFF-45DA-A643-40DBD5784508@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="104618"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: larsi@gnus.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Yuan Fu Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri May 29 09:18:56 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 1jeZI8-000R7b-Ey for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 29 May 2020 09:18:56 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:42090 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jeZI7-0006W1-Gr for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 29 May 2020 03:18:55 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:43264) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jeZH6-0005je-UM for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 29 May 2020 03:17:52 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:49972) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jeZH6-00075e-Im; Fri, 29 May 2020 03:17:52 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=3358 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1jeZH4-0001Q5-Sp; Fri, 29 May 2020 03:17:52 -0400 In-Reply-To: (message from Yuan Fu on Thu, 28 May 2020 16:42:33 -0400) 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:251607 Archived-At: > From: Yuan Fu > Date: Thu, 28 May 2020 16:42:33 -0400 > Cc: Lars Ingebrigtsen , > emacs-devel@gnu.org > > In the meantime I’m still reading the unicode document, the unicode algorithm might require much > more machinery. For one, the wrap-ability doesn’t only depend of the immediate characters anymore, e.g., a > character before the character before could affect this character’s wrap-ability. Which is why I don't recommend conflating these two jobs. Implementing UAX#14 in Emacs is a large job. It should start by determining which part(s) of that algorithm will make sense in Emacs.