From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
Subject: Re: iso-8859-1 and non-latin-1 chars
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 11:42:12 -0500
Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org
Message-ID: <E18NyJo-0003gq-00@fencepost.gnu.org>
References: <rzq65uhy6ew.fsf@albion.dl.ac.uk>
	<rzqhedrp0f5.fsf@albion.dl.ac.uk>
	<200212090608.PAA24291@etlken.m17n.org>
	<rzqfzszfdwg.fsf@albion.dl.ac.uk>
Reply-To: rms@gnu.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org
X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1040059294 16779 80.91.224.249 (16 Dec 2002 17:21:34 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 17:21:34 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: handa@m17n.org
Return-path: <emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org>
Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244])
	by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
	id 18NyvW-0004LR-00
	for <emacs-devel@main.gmane.org>; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 18:21:10 +0100
Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173])
	by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian))
	id 18Nz95-0004OV-00
	for <emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org>; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 18:35:12 +0100
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13)
	id 18NyVP-0002td-09
	for emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 11:54:11 -0500
Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10.13)
	id 18NyQj-0001xl-00
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 11:49:21 -0500
Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10.13)
	id 18NyOG-0000YE-00
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 11:46:49 -0500
Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164])
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13)
	id 18NyJp-0007Ze-00
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 11:42:13 -0500
Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.10)
	id 18NyJo-0003gq-00; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 11:42:12 -0500
Original-To: d.love@dl.ac.uk
In-reply-to: <rzqfzszfdwg.fsf@albion.dl.ac.uk> (message from Dave Love on 15
	Dec 2002 16:25:03 +0000)
Original-cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1b5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Emacs development discussions. <emacs-devel.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-devel@gnu.org>
List-Subscribe: <http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mail.gnu.org/pipermail/emacs-devel>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org
Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:10172
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:10172

    > I suspect that in case 2 we sometimes want it to warn,
    > but I am not certain.  I think that making it warn in case 2
    > is a good idea to start with.

    No.  That would significantly slow down the output operations.

Would you explain why you think so?  Given that in many cases Emacs
does check for such a problem and warn, in the usual case, why should
doing so in other cases cause any concern about speed?