From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jim Porter Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#62224: 30.0.50: Emacs don't, start sends an erroneous error Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2023 13:31:34 -0700 Message-ID: <82ddd844-3acb-cffb-96bb-ea2af53b00e9@gmail.com> References: <628707db-561e-334d-dd98-38a56fa39586@easy-emacs.de> <83wn3gpiip.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="29638"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: andreas.roehler@easy-emacs.de, 62224@debbugs.gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Mar 16 21:32:25 2023 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1pcuGv-0007Vh-DL for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 16 Mar 2023 21:32:25 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pcuGb-00030u-My; Thu, 16 Mar 2023 16:32:07 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pcuGY-00030e-Fc for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 16 Mar 2023 16:32:03 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pcuGY-0000go-5n for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 16 Mar 2023 16:32:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1pcuGX-0003DX-Mh for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 16 Mar 2023 16:32:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Jim Porter Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2023 20:32:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 62224 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 62224-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B62224.167899870412342 (code B ref 62224); Thu, 16 Mar 2023 20:32:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 62224) by debbugs.gnu.org; 16 Mar 2023 20:31:44 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43163 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1pcuGF-0003D0-UK for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 16 Mar 2023 16:31:44 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-pj1-f52.google.com ([209.85.216.52]:40732) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1pcuGE-0003Cm-CM for 62224@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 16 Mar 2023 16:31:42 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-pj1-f52.google.com with SMTP id j3-20020a17090adc8300b0023d09aea4a6so6691242pjv.5 for <62224@debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 16 Mar 2023 13:31:42 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; t=1678998696; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:content-language :references:cc:to:subject:mime-version:date:message-id:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=DgGrvsLXUhFHjrAwFVtWK3nZqr20pkBm72GuDOvwgio=; b=aFUgzf0fh1UhXh7uMBEh8TO1tNVap8u18VNxzfWat72oh+88VlKKudjw91Yk7aVLyg pIj0ZU2Jdapfxzfpdqkv4Gr1fMZZEuBeMWdv3Jl4yF86RIjF6CfZ4bo5RRgfbO31SKeF Bda7u6rjEfPWJu/NbdsziqzXP1lgtdLufX8lafgnVSnxMmiuazx2P0t9TMBjC4JLnt31 vk4RclVD3c2xD1OU9AK6D0iQcP8WOfGcVnxvUdWccqDhAnS7hyLYi52oNVBd51O0Havn nP4AxkUj/RRhc1bN7TVVlUxKGUL07vZEuEUztC8UMxLT6GbCb+rJ5KeI9acXRZ34UHHi ApNQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; t=1678998696; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:content-language :references:cc:to:subject:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=DgGrvsLXUhFHjrAwFVtWK3nZqr20pkBm72GuDOvwgio=; b=oll9iz6OALEcuTPC0CCvpNP31CXxS0Mkov/19YPLrwfpCl50nad/4dmJ81/ICzINLr G3ULJsNYWU6nm/MpYLv9Gboy2QfRPjQZcqBlfx0bnznbXJMPg7xRges600pOsZgav8jn 2V+H2NtO4NXWUTgwhRsYE98Ayxq/wybxuvZcdNpQ6Mj/jcepfPsl81nfnrF1GuaZCyGy zAAXdfpY1rd4PMQEdJcGMJmmtkqExEd+SM8qhOVB9HU9QKgiAkLw7X7IqCQtGR3Dun9k CWOnZ0n7xJnFKEM3O3PzuXbPcPchrapStY692WrHRceuUGHL+iUsBsrK/nWtc88lH+bu zvvQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKUM9DK4tMVDY4Iui124HkkgH98eHaOxNFtOQ5ut0Z18xgJstYt4 MDXgGMdL1sZCx1gQ2ZxWozA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set+lpyew00wolc6dQCJu3EILCQXXPr9Q0+OgKG5EbjjVFS0KF5+Or5mJ367D3nsdXKuQtNQstg== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:d508:b0:19e:b2ed:6fe1 with SMTP id b8-20020a170902d50800b0019eb2ed6fe1mr5779946plg.11.1678998696101; Thu, 16 Mar 2023 13:31:36 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from [192.168.1.2] (cpe-76-168-148-233.socal.res.rr.com. [76.168.148.233]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id h13-20020a170902f7cd00b0019d1f42b00csm131500plw.17.2023.03.16.13.31.35 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 16 Mar 2023 13:31:35 -0700 (PDT) Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: <83wn3gpiip.fsf@gnu.org> X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:258035 Archived-At: On 3/16/2023 1:07 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2023 11:45:40 -0700 >> From: Jim Porter >> >> That said, I think *technically* the manual says that "\x" is allowed: >> >>> You can use any number of hex digits, so you can represent any >>> character code in this way. >> >> Zero is a number, after all. :) Maybe the manual needs an update to be >> more-precise here? > > I'd say that'd be a pedantic interpretation of the text, but I've > reworded it to avoid such misinterpretation anyway. Oh, it's very pedantic, I agree. I'm not sure anyone would have misinterpreted that text in practice, but I think this makes it 100% clear what syntax is acceptable. Thanks for the fix.