From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs Lisp's future Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2014 19:50:37 +0900 Message-ID: <87ppe1pldu.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> References: <87d2ahm3nw.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <871tqneyvl.fsf@netris.org> <87zjd9swfj.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87oatnqpml.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <874mvdrj45.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <20141009044917.GA19957@fencepost.gnu.org> <83lhopisfr.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1412851882 31805 80.91.229.3 (9 Oct 2014 10:51:22 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2014 10:51:22 +0000 (UTC) Cc: dak@gnu.org, rms@gnu.org, handa@gnu.org, mhw@netris.org, dmantipov@yandex.ru, emacs-devel@gnu.org, Mike Gerwitz , monnier@iro.umontreal.ca To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Oct 09 12:51:14 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 1XcBJS-00022M-7h for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 09 Oct 2014 12:51:14 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:41737 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XcBJR-0007Rl-TC for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 09 Oct 2014 06:51:13 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:37742) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XcBJI-0007Qj-9l for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 09 Oct 2014 06:51:11 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XcBJA-0002OY-RL for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 09 Oct 2014 06:51:04 -0400 Original-Received: from shako.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp ([130.158.97.161]:58298) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XcBIu-0002K3-J6; Thu, 09 Oct 2014 06:50:41 -0400 Original-Received: from uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp [130.158.99.156]) by shako.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3FD41C38C8; Thu, 9 Oct 2014 19:50:37 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: by uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 9B9AA1A2888; Thu, 9 Oct 2014 19:50:37 +0900 (JST) In-Reply-To: <83lhopisfr.fsf@gnu.org> X-Mailer: VM undefined under 21.5 (beta34) "kale" acf1c26e3019 XEmacs Lucid (x86_64-unknown-linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 130.158.97.161 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:175180 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: > Aren't you again confusing the application level with the lower > "engine" level? No, you and David are confused. All experience with programming systems shows that if you leave security up to the application programmers, you won't get enough. Remember, the security of a system is equal to the minimum of the security levels of its components. Of course the engine level needs to provide the *option* to be flexible. But that flexibility must be opt-in for the applications that need to be nonconformant, not opt-out for the applications that are happy to conform. The latter won't bother ("it's too much to type"). In the case of Emacs coding systems, it's as simple as choosing to name the conformant coding system 'utf-8, and the non-conformant one 'utf-8-with-rawbytes. Why does this excite such opposition?