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: master 64e25cd: More robust NS hex colour string parsing Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2020 22:11:10 +0300 Message-ID: <83pna43xrl.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20200608120746.30163.87810@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <20200608120747.80E8E20A2E@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <83r1uk429y.fsf@gnu.org> <3C92A091-F389-4179-B2F0-B3AA5ABD6CCE@acm.org> 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="128166"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: pipcet@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Mattias =?utf-8?Q?Engdeg=C3=A5rd?= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Jun 12 21:17:39 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 1jjpBK-000XEz-C0 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 12 Jun 2020 21:17:38 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:36272 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jjpBJ-0000xQ-Dr for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 12 Jun 2020 15:17:37 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:57724) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jjp5G-0007vi-4J for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Jun 2020 15:11:22 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:41750) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jjp5F-0008WR-P9; Fri, 12 Jun 2020 15:11:21 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=1661 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1jjp5E-0004fZ-Tk; Fri, 12 Jun 2020 15:11:21 -0400 In-Reply-To: <3C92A091-F389-4179-B2F0-B3AA5ABD6CCE@acm.org> (message from Mattias =?utf-8?Q?Engdeg=C3=A5rd?= on Fri, 12 Jun 2020 21:00:10 +0200) 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:252148 Archived-At: > From: Mattias Engdegård > Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2020 21:00:10 +0200 > Cc: pipcet@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org > > 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. Thanks, but I don't think I understand the answer well enough to make up my mind regarding the proposed code. The error checking aside, are the return values of the original code the same as of the proposed unified code? If not, which of the 4 current versions differ, and how?