From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: master 3fc859d: Go back to iso-2022-7bit for titdic-cnv.el again Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2020 12:53:05 -0500 Message-ID: References: <20200105203051.21185.19313@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <20200105203053.36B932105B@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <83mub0ecnk.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="54951"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: eggert@cs.ucla.edu, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jan 06 18:53:45 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1ioWZT-000EBE-RX for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 06 Jan 2020 18:53:44 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:57254 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ioWZS-0002op-C8 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 06 Jan 2020 12:53:42 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:36297) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ioWYz-0002OL-N6 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Jan 2020 12:53:14 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ioWYy-0004GC-B9 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Jan 2020 12:53:13 -0500 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:53059) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ioWYw-0004E9-TP; Mon, 06 Jan 2020 12:53:11 -0500 Original-Received: from pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id D4D0A100A09; Mon, 6 Jan 2020 12:53:09 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 786901003B1; Mon, 6 Jan 2020 12:53:08 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1578333188; bh=LFCqGLHwS4uMRLIkfpvYcM81t3JceM+xVdI85OLwWjE=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=NxeLIYIgptQhsrqQLpioRMeoLy+ArJCqZudCx2s+DUYme8KPckRssQRpGSMBZopM1 L97rbLGP6R+rCzLSx7DlagMOKO+/5AOmkT1lwdVUOULuqavIjgTZ8BuIb22fZvuRbz wD2i3Y5AY04KWvp9HE8wuHPjOGWfFA0xIi5ayhFbOyihM7xiJK3id4LIxrm3LgYt0I fSB+CwLcQZi5CABoxTL/Q2R96uiOfGd1HFA7j6pdLE1gWRAcCQEoESTSgn5O4V8cuX ikVj1R2zVPLSlTcgeCG6gYQMvgVaTav1/4xNkS1EaPgg3luMqWbsMDkhQKYsNGbEIr /wDA5WEGct8UQ== Original-Received: from alfajor (modemcable157.163-203-24.mc.videotron.ca [24.203.163.157]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3BF4C1202A5; Mon, 6 Jan 2020 12:53:08 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <83mub0ecnk.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Mon, 06 Jan 2020 19:07:59 +0200") X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 132.204.25.50 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:244038 Archived-At: > If the charset properties are not important here at all (I'm not sure > yet), then we should rewrite that code not to "select" one of 2 > identical strings. And if the charset is important, we should still > have only one copy of each string, but propertize it with the charset > selected according to the big5-p flag. Agreed. My point was mostly that reverting the encoding to iso-2022 is probably not the best course of action and that other than "uselessly complex code" I couldn't find a concrete problem description that can help decide whether the charset properties are actually relevant. I'm beginning to believe they're not: they may have been back in Emacs<23 when it was important to pick the right characters from the right charset, but since we switched to Unicode for our internals, the distinction has disappeared. Stefan