From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: [OFFTOPIC] Re: Invoking a function from a list of functions Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2018 20:57:50 +0200 Message-ID: <83muptdo7l.fsf@gnu.org> References: <67c4a534-d41c-4736-8839-c2dbbdf7f9c2@googlegroups.com> <2da7504a-8bbf-41b9-993e-a7bacd6c97b2@googlegroups.com> <20181116114002.3ba6bcc8dc1e699ba58e08b8@speakeasy.net> <20181119172358.802ce30c54f2fd20f8c300c4@speakeasy.net> <82781d42-afa5-4cb8-9cbd-b20eb73b26d0@googlegroups.com> <83wooxduzz.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1543431370 32223 195.159.176.226 (28 Nov 2018 18:56:10 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2018 18:56:10 +0000 (UTC) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Nov 28 19:56:06 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1gS50H-000884-Hf for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 28 Nov 2018 19:56:05 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:49553 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gS52I-0007I4-NE for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 28 Nov 2018 13:58:10 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:46347) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gS51q-0007Hy-CM for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 28 Nov 2018 13:57:43 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gS51n-0001K6-88 for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 28 Nov 2018 13:57:42 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:47928) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gS51n-0001JE-4S for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 28 Nov 2018 13:57:39 -0500 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=4284 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1gS51m-00063M-OZ for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 28 Nov 2018 13:57:39 -0500 In-reply-to: (message from Yuri Khan on Thu, 29 Nov 2018 01:15:41 +0700) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "help-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:118796 Archived-At: > From: Yuri Khan > Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2018 01:15:41 +0700 > Cc: help-gnu-emacs > > > That's debatable: the Unicode Standard says to act according to > > canonical equivalence only in text, whereas the above are symbol > > names. We do display them the same (if the font supports that), but > > we aren't under any obligation to map them to the same symbols, IMO. > > Standard Annex 31 deals with identifiers in programming languages, and > recommends considering identifiers equivalent if they are the same > under Normalization Form C for case-sensitive languages (such as > Python and Elisp). "Implementations that take normalization and case into account have two choices: to treat variants as equivalent, or to disallow variants." So there's a choice. > (It suggests using Normalization Form KC for case-insensitive > languages, although I do not see how compatibility decomposition is > similar to case folding.) Case-folding is considered a special case of character folding. > > > ELISP> (list Α A) > > > ("hi" "there") > > > > Why bad? Those characters are not canonically equivalent. > > They are not even compatibility equivalent. I didn't say they were. > > If you > > want to go by compatibility equivalence, you will enter a slippery > > slope, where, for example, Ⅰ and 1 will yield the same symbol or even > > the same number. > > No they won’t. Compatibility decomposition of U+2160 ROMAN NUMERAL ONE > is U+0073 LATIN CAPITAL LETTER I. Yes, a mistaken example, sorry. But the idea is clear, I hope. E.g., the compatibility decomposition of ⁵ is 5, and the compatibility decomposition of ⑴, a single character, is (1), which is a list in Emacs. That way lies madness, IMO.