From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: "Raw" string literals for elisp Date: Mon, 04 Oct 2021 15:00:50 +0300 Message-ID: <83k0it6lu5.fsf@gnu.org> References: <4209edd83cfee7c84b2d75ebfcd38784fa21b23c.camel@crossproduct.net> <87v92ft9z6.fsf@db48x.net> <87o885tyle.fsf@db48x.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="18445"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, rms@gnu.org, anna@crossproduct.net To: Daniel Brooks Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Oct 04 14:09:45 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1mXMmu-0004Vu-Tc for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 04 Oct 2021 14:09:44 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38068 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mXMmt-0003zT-NF for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 04 Oct 2021 08:09:43 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:43788) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mXMej-0000li-54 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 04 Oct 2021 08:01:18 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:49790) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mXMeh-0004uM-UH; Mon, 04 Oct 2021 08:01:16 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:2607 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mXMeW-0004Om-5w; Mon, 04 Oct 2021 08:01:05 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87o885tyle.fsf@db48x.net> (message from Daniel Brooks on Sun, 03 Oct 2021 17:36:45 -0700) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:276174 Archived-At: > From: Daniel Brooks > Date: Sun, 03 Oct 2021 17:36:45 -0700 > Cc: anna@crossproduct.net, emacs-devel@gnu.org > > Richard Stallman writes: > > > Indeed, using any non-ASCII characters in source files can have some > > problems, which are very easy to avoid. We should not give syntactic > > roles to them. > > We should be improving the terminal then, rather than constraining > everything to the lowest common denominator. Unicode exists for an > important accessibility reason, even if some of it is frivolous > (emoji). Limiting Emacs source code to English and ASCII will ultimately > only limit the acceptibility of Emacs rather than improve it. We can only do this much. We don't develop any terminal emulators here, except the two built into Emacs. Given that even the Linux console turns out to have staggering gaps in its support for Unicode, I see no reason for us to pretend Unicode is supported well enough on the terminals to ignore this issue. > For example, if someone contributes a mode it will normally be accepted > as–is. But if they write the that mode using Japanese characters, would we > turn them away? I think that we should not. Why is Japanese different from any other script in this context? I thin unnecessary use of non-ASCII characters, any non-ASCII characters, should be avoided, for the reasons mentioned above. See bug#50865 for a recent example that left me astonished.