From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: cannot understand Elisp manual node Glyphs Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 22:07:34 +0100 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1171228038 25115 80.91.229.12 (11 Feb 2007 21:07:18 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 21:07:18 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Drew Adams , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Feb 11 22:07:12 2007 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 1HGLuh-0006bo-0y for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 11 Feb 2007 22:07:11 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HGLug-0005tZ-8U for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 11 Feb 2007 16:07:10 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HGLuU-0005tU-G6 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 11 Feb 2007 16:06:58 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HGLuT-0005sz-Sz for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 11 Feb 2007 16:06:58 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HGLuT-0005ss-QQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 11 Feb 2007 16:06:57 -0500 Original-Received: from pfepa.post.tele.dk ([195.41.46.235]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1HGLuS-0001go-Fm; Sun, 11 Feb 2007 16:06:56 -0500 Original-Received: from kfs-l.imdomain.dk.cua.dk (0x503e2644.bynxx19.adsl-dhcp.tele.dk [80.62.38.68]) by pfepa.post.tele.dk (Postfix) with SMTP id F2270FAC059; Sun, 11 Feb 2007 22:06:54 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: (Richard Stallman's message of "Sat\, 10 Feb 2007 12\:40\:57 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.93 (gnu/linux) X-detected-kernel: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) 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:66272 Archived-At: Richard Stallman writes: > We could replace the display table feature with a feature to just > specify a face for highlighting a character code. Or, if it is > important to be able to replace it with a different character code, > we could use (CHAR . FACE). Isn't that exactly what the display table is all about (with the addition of the "extra slots"). And yes, (CHAR . FACE) is exactly what I had in mind for the Emacs 23 implementation of make-glyph-code, glyph-char, and glyph-face. The exact reason I would add make-glyph-code, glyph-face and glyph-char NOW is to allow us to cleanly make that change in Emacs 23 without breaking Emacs 22 complient code (that uses those functions). > We can decide this later. I STRONGLY disagree. To me, it makes no sense to keep the current description of glyph codes in Emacs 22 when we _KNOW_ that code based on the current text will _NOT_ work in Emacs 23. Replacing the text with the text I wrote would give a clean transition from Emacs 22 to Emacs 23. We should note in Emacs 22 NEWS that to generate glyph codes, user should use the new functions, and that the old method of using numeric glyph codes is obsolete, and will be removed in Emacs 23. I honestly don't see why anyone can disagree with this! And I don't see what _harm_ it can do. -- Kim F. Storm http://www.cua.dk