Re: Your last change to browse-url is bogus.

["Davis Herring" <herring@lanl.gov>]

> That depends on how you look at it.  If you think of them as
> operations on characters, they're the same.  If you think of them as
> operations on strings, they're different (ie, it's possible to find
> strings which are not transformed tthe same way by both operations).
> [...]
> In that case it would make sense to give the escaping function that
> takes the set of characters an "-internal" or "-helper" name (excuse
> me, I don't know the GNU conventions for this), and use nice efficient
> defsubsts for the semantically mnemonic public entry points.

I think I agree, and that the first paragraph above (perhaps
unintentionally) supports the second.  It is an implementation detail that
the filename->URL and other->URL (I don't remember the other item)
operations, which are semantically different, can use the same
string-substitution subroutine.  So I'd rename the function in question to
"browse-url-escape-chars" and then have "browse-url-escape-filename" and
"browse-url-escape-<other>" that called it.

Davis

-- 
This product is sold by volume, not by mass.  If it appears too dense or
too sparse, it is because mass-energy conversion has occurred during
shipping.