Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> schrieb am Di., 26. Dez. 2017 um 05:46 Uhr:

> > From: Philipp Stephani <p.stephani2@gmail.com>
> > Date: Mon, 25 Dec 2017 22:01:15 +0100
> > Cc: Philipp Stephani <phst@google.com>
> >
> > +/* Return the Unicode code point for the given UTF-16 surrogates.  */
> > +
> > +INLINE int
> > +surrogates_to_codepoint (int low, int high)
> > +{
> > +  eassert (char_low_surrogate_p (low));
> > +  eassert (char_high_surrogate_p (high));
> > +  return 0x10000 + (low - 0xDC00) + ((high - 0xD800) * 0x400);
> > +}
> > +
> >  /* Data type for Unicode general category.
>
> Suggest to move surrogates_to_codepoint to coding.c, and then use the
> macros UTF_16_HIGH_SURROGATE_P and UTF_16_LOW_SURROGATE_P defined
> there.


Hmm, I'd rather go the other way round and remove these macros later. They
are macros, thus worse than functions, and don't seem to be correct either
(what about a value such as 0x11DC00?).


>   Also, a single-liner sounds like too little to justify a
> function, so maybe make all of that macros in coding.h, and include
> the latter in nsterm.m.
>

No new macros please if we can avoid it. Functions are strictly better.
I don't care much whether they are in character.h or coding.h, but
char_surrogate_p is already in character.h.


>
> > +  USE_SAFE_ALLOCA;
> > +  unichar *utf16_buffer;
> > +  SAFE_NALLOCA (utf16_buffer, 1, len);
>
> Maximum length of a UTF-16 sequence is known in advance, so why do you
> need SAFE_NALLOCA here?  Couldn't you use a buffer of fixed length
> instead?
>
>
The text being inserted can be arbitrarily long. Even single characters
(i.e. extended grapheme clusters) can be arbitrarily long.