From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Alan Mackenzie Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: Inadequate documentation of silly characters on screen. Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 20:53:54 +0000 Message-ID: <20091119205354.GF1314@muc.de> References: <20091119082040.GA1720@muc.de> <874ooq8xay.fsf@wanchan.jasonrumney.net> <20091119141852.GC1720@muc.de> <20091119155848.GB1314@muc.de> <87aayiihe9.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <20091119180848.GE1314@muc.de> <834ooqqoln.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1258663751 29521 80.91.229.12 (19 Nov 2009 20:49:11 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 20:49:11 +0000 (UTC) Cc: dak@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Nov 19 21:49:03 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 1NBDw7-0002vG-Ev for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 19 Nov 2009 21:49:03 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57066 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NBDw7-00060s-2G for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 19 Nov 2009 15:49:03 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NBDw0-0005zx-LP for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Nov 2009 15:48:56 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NBDvw-0005xV-7M for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Nov 2009 15:48:56 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=55667 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NBDvw-0005xN-1V for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Nov 2009 15:48:52 -0500 Original-Received: from colin.muc.de ([193.149.48.1]:3769 helo=mail.muc.de) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NBDvv-0007oy-66 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Nov 2009 15:48:51 -0500 Original-Received: (qmail 85556 invoked by uid 3782); 19 Nov 2009 20:48:49 -0000 Original-Received: from acm.muc.de (pD9E51409.dip.t-dialin.net [217.229.20.9]) by colin2.muc.de (tmda-ofmipd) with ESMTP; Thu, 19 Nov 2009 21:48:48 +0100 Original-Received: (qmail 5696 invoked by uid 1000); 19 Nov 2009 20:53:54 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <834ooqqoln.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i X-Delivery-Agent: TMDA/1.1.5 (Fettercairn) X-Primary-Address: acm@muc.de X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: FreeBSD 4.6-4.9 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:117297 Archived-At: Hi, Eli! On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 09:52:20PM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 18:08:48 +0000 > > From: Alan Mackenzie > > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > > No, you (all of you) are missing the point. That point is that if an > > Emacs Lisp hacker writes "?ñ", it should work, regardless of what > > "codepoint" it has, what "bytes" represent it, whether those "bytes" > > are coded with a different codepoint, or what have you. > No can do, as long as we support both unibyte and multibyte buffers > and strings. This seems to be the big thing. That ?ñ has no unique meaning. The current situation violates the description on the elisp page "Basic Char Syntax", which describes the situation as I understood it up until half an hour ago. > > OK. Surely displaying it as "\361" is a bug? > If `a' can be represented as 97, then why cannot \361 be represented > as 4194289? ROFLMAO. If this weren't true, you couldn't invent it. ;-) > > So, how did the character "ñ" get turned into the illegal byte #xf1? > It did so because you used aset to put it into a unibyte string. So, what should I have done to achieve the desired effect? How should I modify "(aset nl 0 ?ü)" so that it does the Right Thing? > > Are you saying that Emacs is converting "?ñ" and "?ä" into the wrong > > integers? > Emacs can convert it into 2 distinct integer representations. It > decides which one by the context. And you just happened to give it > the wrong context. OK, I understand that now, thanks. > > > Because Emacs has no separate "character" data type. > > For which I am thankful. > Then please understand that there's no bug here. Oh, I disagree with that. But, whatever.... -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).