From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs Lisp's future Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2014 11:22:07 +0200 Message-ID: <87iojt61j4.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> References: <54193A70.9020901@member.fsf.org> <87h9ztm5oa.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <87d2ahm3nw.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <871tqneyvl.fsf@netris.org> <87d2a54t1m.fsf@yeeloong.lan> <83lhotme1e.fsf@gnu.org> <871tql17uw.fsf@yeeloong.lan> <838uktm9gw.fsf@gnu.org> <87h9zgarvp.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <83y4srjaot.fsf@gnu.org> <83r3yhiu8c.fsf@gnu.org> <8738ax7k8w.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <83k349iqjj.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1412846556 30658 80.91.229.3 (9 Oct 2014 09:22:36 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2014 09:22:36 +0000 (UTC) Cc: rms@gnu.org, mhw@netris.org, dmantipov@yandex.ru, emacs-devel@gnu.org, handa@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, stephen@xemacs.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Oct 09 11:22:26 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Xc9vV-0006on-Ca for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 09 Oct 2014 11:22:25 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:41269 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xc9vU-0003FJ-UH for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 09 Oct 2014 05:22:24 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49638) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xc9vO-0003F7-9R for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 09 Oct 2014 05:22:22 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xc9vN-0000wd-A3 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 09 Oct 2014 05:22:18 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:35181) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xc9vN-0000wW-7M for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 09 Oct 2014 05:22:17 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:42354 helo=lola) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xc9vD-0000qU-QT; Thu, 09 Oct 2014 05:22:08 -0400 Original-Received: by lola (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 63857E0500; Thu, 9 Oct 2014 11:22:07 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <83k349iqjj.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Thu, 09 Oct 2014 11:41:04 +0300") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.4.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:175177 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> From: David Kastrup >> Cc: rms@gnu.org, mhw@netris.org, dmantipov@yandex.ru, >> emacs-devel@gnu.org, handa@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, >> stephen@xemacs.org >> Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2014 09:52:31 +0200 >> >> I still don't want the autosave of mail to complain about bad >> characters. > > We write the auto-save files in the internal format, so it never > complains. If you are not allowed or able to do that... At the current point of time, the only round-trippable encoding for bytes that GUILE offers is latin-1, and the only round-trippable encoding for characters is utf-8. The conceptual lack of separation between internal and external utf-8 encoding leads to strangenesses like scheme@(guile-user)> (with-input-from-string "\ufeff!" read-char) $8 = #\! Yes, this is a string->string operation losing a byte order mark in spite of no indication that I would like to get encodings involved in any manner. Now we'll probably get "oh, that's a bug, we'll fix it". But the point is that being sloppy with the distinction between internal and external character sets and encodings and "valid" and "invalid" will buy you unmatched encoding/decoding passes inviting such problems. And when I can say "let's see where this kind of thinking will lead" and find a hole to poke within a minute, so will malicious people. And that is a real security concern. Also: if I do not even manage to save a string into a string in "the internal format" unchanged, good luck with your auto-save file. -- David Kastrup