From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: quimby.gnus.org!not-for-mail From: Miles Bader Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [simon.marshall@misys.com: FW: [21.1.90]: should coding be recalculated on revert-buffer?] Date: 25 Feb 2002 16:25:22 +0900 Message-ID: References: <200202250701.QAA01581@etlken.m17n.org> Reply-To: Miles Bader NNTP-Posting-Host: quimby2.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: quimby2.netfonds.no 1014622388 28498 195.204.10.66 (25 Feb 2002 07:33:08 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@quimby2.netfonds.no NNTP-Posting-Date: 25 Feb 2002 07:33:08 GMT Cc: rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by quimby2.netfonds.no with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 16fFdE-0007PY-00 for ; Mon, 25 Feb 2002 08:33:08 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 16fFaS-00065b-00; Mon, 25 Feb 2002 02:30:16 -0500 Original-Received: from tyo201.gate.nec.co.jp ([202.32.8.214]) by fencepost.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 16fFYA-0005xh-00; Mon, 25 Feb 2002 02:27:55 -0500 Original-Received: from mailgate4.nec.co.jp ([10.7.69.197]) by TYO201.gate.nec.co.jp (8.11.6/3.7W01080315) with ESMTP id g1P7RnX13089; Mon, 25 Feb 2002 16:27:49 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: from mailsv.nec.co.jp (mailgate51.nec.co.jp [10.7.69.196]) by mailgate4.nec.co.jp (8.11.6/3.7W-MAILGATE-NEC) with ESMTP id g1P7RkR29908; Mon, 25 Feb 2002 16:27:47 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: from mcsss2.ucom.lsi.nec.co.jp ([10.30.114.133]) by mailsv.nec.co.jp (8.11.6/3.7W-MAILSV-NEC) with ESMTP id g1P7PN802426; Mon, 25 Feb 2002 16:27:18 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: from mcspd15.ucom.lsi.nec.co.jp (mcspd15 [10.30.114.174]) by mcsss2.ucom.lsi.nec.co.jp (8.10.2+Sun/3.7Wlsi_mx_6.0) with ESMTP id g1P7PMg03203; Mon, 25 Feb 2002 16:25:22 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: by mcspd15.ucom.lsi.nec.co.jp (Postfix, from userid 31295) id 67F3237C1; Mon, 25 Feb 2002 16:25:22 +0900 (JST) Original-To: Kenichi Handa System-Type: i686-pc-linux-gnu Blat: Foop In-Reply-To: <200202250701.QAA01581@etlken.m17n.org> Original-Lines: 16 Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.5 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: quimby.gnus.org gmane.emacs.devel:1509 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:1509 Kenichi Handa writes: > But, if one visited a file with C-x RET c CODING RET C-x C-f > FILENAME RET, it usually means that the file encoding is > different from what Emacs automatically detects. Thus, in > such a case, we had better read the file with the same > coding system (i.e. CODING). > > And, it's difficult to distinguish the above two cases. Couldn't you set a buffer-local flag to true if the coding is auto-detected (which `C-x C-m c' & friends would then set to false), and then only re-detect the coding system upon rever if the flag was true? -Miles -- Run away! Run away! _______________________________________________ Emacs-devel mailing list Emacs-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel