From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs Lisp's future Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2014 23:22:57 -0400 Message-ID: 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> <83siiw9c6t.fsf@gnu.org> <87siiv2hx0.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1413084192 13287 80.91.229.3 (12 Oct 2014 03:23:12 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2014 03:23:12 +0000 (UTC) Cc: mhw@netris.org, dmantipov@yandex.ru, emacs-devel@gnu.org, handa@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, eliz@gnu.org, stephen@xemacs.org To: David Kastrup Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Oct 12 05:23:06 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 1Xd9kP-00075S-Uk for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 12 Oct 2014 05:23:06 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:55924 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xd9kP-0001gg-Fk for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 11 Oct 2014 23:23:05 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:38695) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xd9kK-0001g2-TN for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Oct 2014 23:23:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xd9kJ-0006C4-VD for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Oct 2014 23:23:00 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:58793) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xd9kJ-0006C0-Rd for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Oct 2014 23:22:59 -0400 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xd9kH-0008Ij-VO; Sat, 11 Oct 2014 23:22:58 -0400 In-reply-to: <87siiv2hx0.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> (message from David Kastrup on Sat, 11 Oct 2014 09:18:35 +0200) 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:175269 Archived-At: [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider ]]] [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]] [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]] > It will be easy to specify one or the other, so why not make the default > be strict, except in the primitives that operate on files? Because we had that already. What exactly did we have already? Are we talking about the same thing? When we lost users in large droves to XEmacs at the time Emacs became the loss leader for multibyte encodings by making MULE manadatory, a significant number of those users who went were the ones not even using non-ASCII locales, and they would purportedly not even have noticed a difference with the files they were supposed to be working with. But in practice, files and communications don't pass the purity tests. I'm talking about the default for encodings that are NOT done for reading and writing files. You seem to be talking about files. > There are many ways for two different designs to be "similar". They > are also different. The details are crucial for users' reactions. I > think the people who objected to those behaviors, which involved > changing the file contents, might not mind the confirmation much. That kind of choice would require the assumption that any file operation (and any other encoding/decoding action) is an immediate, direct, and obvious consequence of a user interaction with Emacs. I don't quite follow you. Could you present a concrete example to show what you mean? However, I think I follow part of it. If a program does explicit encoding and decoding operations but does them as part of showing text to the user, it should specify doing them in the same flexible way used by the usual file operations. For instance, decoding an email to show to the user should be done the flexible way. It won't be hard to change these programs to specify "flexible" for the decoding if that is not the default for the encoding primitives. -- Dr Richard Stallman President, Free Software Foundation 51 Franklin St Boston MA 02110 USA www.fsf.org www.gnu.org Skype: No way! That's nonfree (freedom-denying) software. Use Ekiga or an ordinary phone call.