From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [emacs-bidi] Treatment of LRE,RLE,LRO,RLO,PDF,LRM,RLM Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2010 15:51:03 +0200 Message-ID: <83aalde3i0.fsf@gnu.org> References: Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1289656281 16842 80.91.229.12 (13 Nov 2010 13:51:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2010 13:51:21 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Kenichi Handa Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Nov 13 14:51:16 2010 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 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PHGVe-0007zc-RL for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 13 Nov 2010 14:51:15 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48500 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PHGVe-0000YB-B1 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 13 Nov 2010 08:51:14 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=46233 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PHGVU-0000U2-BI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 13 Nov 2010 08:51:06 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PHGVP-0000me-RA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 13 Nov 2010 08:51:04 -0500 Original-Received: from mtaout20.012.net.il ([80.179.55.166]:59999) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PHGVP-0000mJ-Jl for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 13 Nov 2010 08:50:59 -0500 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout20.012.net.il by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0LBT00G00T4OGB00@a-mtaout20.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 13 Nov 2010 15:50:58 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.126.249.126]) by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0LBT00FPPT4WKBG0@a-mtaout20.012.net.il>; Sat, 13 Nov 2010 15:50:57 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) 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:132596 Archived-At: > From: Kenichi Handa > Cc: emacs-bidi@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2010 20:16:57 +0900 > > And, for tty, as it's impossible to do the same thing as > graphic terminal, the current code does this: > > thin-space: same as empty-box > hexa-code: display "U+XX", "U+XXXX", "U+XXXXXX" , > "E+XXXXXX" depends on the character code (the last > one is for a character of code >= #x110000). > acronym: surround an acronym by "[" and "]" as this: > "[ZWNJ]", "[LRE]" > > At the moment, that is hardcoded in the function > produce_glyphless_glyph of term.c. > > And, for tty, `no-font' means a character not encodable by > the terminal coding system. There are a few issues that perhaps need to be fixed: . If the default value of terminal-coding-system is nil, glyphless character display does not take effect: all the non-ASCII characters are displayed as question marks. I think this is because safe_terminal_coding claims it can safely encode any character. This look inconsistent and confusing, so I think we should fix that. . Composite characters are displayed as question marks regardless of the setting of glyphless-char-display-control. I think this is because term.c:produce_composite_glyph does not consider the new glyphless-char display feature. I think users will expect that composite characters behave like un-encodable characters on a TTY.