From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Drew Adams Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: Upcoming loss of usability of Emacs source files and Emacs. Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2015 15:08:13 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <359326ed-f321-4827-ba15-04f81742ac4a@default> References: <20150615142237.GA3517@acm.fritz.box> <87y4jkhqh5.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <557F3C22.4060909@cs.ucla.edu> <5580D356.4050708@cs.ucla.edu> <87si9qonxb.fsf@gnu.org> <5581C29E.1030101@yandex.ru> <558D6A3D.1070706@yandex.ru> <877fqnzpno.fsf@gnu.org> <5590493C.8000007@yandex.ru> <87381bzife.fsf@gnu.org> <75f2fe0f-f15e-4af8-b9ae-0ddc9231c9ab@default> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1435615720 6498 80.91.229.3 (29 Jun 2015 22:08:40 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2015 22:08:40 +0000 (UTC) Cc: eggert@cs.ucla.edu, tsdh@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, dgutov@yandex.ru, acm@muc.de, stephen@xemacs.org To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jun 30 00:08:28 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Z9hE4-00050W-J8 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 30 Jun 2015 00:08:28 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:44210 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z9hE4-0002bF-0A for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 29 Jun 2015 18:08:28 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:38873) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z9hDz-0002ay-Kj for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Jun 2015 18:08:24 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z9hDv-000784-H4 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Jun 2015 18:08:23 -0400 Original-Received: from aserp1040.oracle.com ([141.146.126.69]:36177) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z9hDv-00077h-B1; Mon, 29 Jun 2015 18:08:19 -0400 Original-Received: from aserv0021.oracle.com (aserv0021.oracle.com [141.146.126.233]) by aserp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id t5TM8FeD002384 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 29 Jun 2015 22:08:15 GMT Original-Received: from userv0121.oracle.com (userv0121.oracle.com [156.151.31.72]) by aserv0021.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t5TM8Ebb001293 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 29 Jun 2015 22:08:14 GMT Original-Received: from abhmp0007.oracle.com (abhmp0007.oracle.com [141.146.116.13]) by userv0121.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t5TM8DIc020048; Mon, 29 Jun 2015 22:08:13 GMT In-Reply-To: X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9 (901082) [OL 12.0.6691.5000 (x86)] X-Source-IP: aserv0021.oracle.com [141.146.126.233] X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.4.x-2.6.x [generic] X-Received-From: 141.146.126.69 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:187655 Archived-At: > > =E2=97=84foobar=E2=96=BA BLACK (LEFT|RIGHT)-POINTING POINTER >=20 > These quotes display identically on my console, as > diamonds, and the input methods I use do not support them. >=20 Precisely. That's why the suggestion to use them was rhetorical. Just like curly quotes, which we have now apparently moved to, alas, these chars are hard to input, search, use with other programs, etc., as several people have pointed out clearly. The point wrt these pointy chars was that (a) they suffer all of the drawbacks of curly quotes, but (b) they at least are not quote marks and are thus not confusable with text quotations. Setting off inline code fragments is not quotation. Because of (a), I do not suggest using such marks. The argument here is that IF we were to pay the price of opting for some Unicode chars to wrap inline code phrases etc. THEN we should at least choose other Unicode chars that are not quote chars. We apparently have already chosen curly quotes, unfortunately. That is the worst of the various possibilities, IMO. Even rare, crazy-pointy thingies are a better choice. That's the argument here. If we shouldn't use these thingies - for the reasons you gave and similar, then a fortiori we should not use curly quotes either.