From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: buffer-swap-text and multibyteness Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 16:57:26 -0500 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1234303417 18660 80.91.229.12 (10 Feb 2009 22:03:37 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 22:03:37 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, rms@gnu.org, handa@m17n.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Feb 10 23:04:52 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1LX0ic-00016p-V6 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2009 23:04:39 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54884 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LX0hJ-0002uD-0P for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2009 17:03:17 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LX0bu-0007Y0-GV for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2009 16:57:42 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LX0bs-0007XO-Tc for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2009 16:57:42 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=38500 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LX0bs-0007XL-HR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2009 16:57:40 -0500 Original-Received: from chene.dit.umontreal.ca ([132.204.246.20]:44450) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LX0bj-0007PT-Jo; Tue, 10 Feb 2009 16:57:31 -0500 Original-Received: from alfajor.home (vpn-132-204-232-166.acd.umontreal.ca [132.204.232.166]) by chene.dit.umontreal.ca (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id n1ALvQv3026890; Tue, 10 Feb 2009 16:57:26 -0500 Original-Received: by alfajor.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 6D97AA22E2; Tue, 10 Feb 2009 16:57:26 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Tue, 10 Feb 2009 10:49:38 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.90 (gnu/linux) X-NAI-Spam-Score: 0 X-NAI-Spam-Rules: 1 Rules triggered RV3208=0 X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:108967 Archived-At: >> >> In my poiunt of view, the way "edit" should work is that it should >> >> basically be put into `message-mode' and then "saving" would simply >> >> encode the whole message (as if preparing to send it). >> > I'm not sure this isn't an overkill. >> >> Not sure why you'd think so. > When did you last look at the code you were describing? It does a lot > more then just encode the message and add/rewrite the Content-Type > headers. But... why do you think this "a lot more" is not needed/useful in the case of rmailedit? > We don't, but IIRC the code each of these places has is tightly > coupled with other package-specific processing. If we want a single > general-purpose one, we need first to refactor it. Again, please take > a look at each of these packages. Yes, I'm aware of this problem. Some refactoring will be needed. But such a refactoring would be a good thing. Whereas adding another implementation would just not benefit anyone else. Stefan