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: uni-mirrored.el and uni-bidi.el Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 20:55:53 +0300 Message-ID: <83pqkawm3a.fsf@gnu.org> References: <874o1mcypz.fsf@stupidchicken.com> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1313171760 24722 80.91.229.12 (12 Aug 2011 17:56:00 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 17:56:00 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Chong Yidong Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Aug 12 19:55:56 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Qrvxc-0005H8-DM for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 19:55:56 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38371 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qrvxb-0004DP-N4 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 13:55:55 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:40222) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QrvxY-0004D9-N8 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 13:55:53 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QrvxX-0004rc-Nn for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 13:55:52 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout20.012.net.il ([80.179.55.166]:38408) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QrvxX-0004rU-G0 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 13:55:51 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout20.012.net.il by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0LPT00J00TQ5S500@a-mtaout20.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 20:55:50 +0300 (IDT) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.228.94.185]) by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0LPT00IP3TT1U3G0@a-mtaout20.012.net.il>; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 20:55:50 +0300 (IDT) In-reply-to: <874o1mcypz.fsf@stupidchicken.com> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-Received-From: 80.179.55.166 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:143166 Archived-At: > From: Chong Yidong > Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 13:43:20 -0400 > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > > This is immediately relevant if we want to change some C code to be bidi > aware, like generate-new-buffer-name. Are you thinking about using directional controls in buffer names only if the buffer name needs it, btw? If so, I'm not sure that's the best idea. For starters, code that deals with buffer names would need to make non-trivial tests to know whether to remove these controls or not, if that code needs the original undecorated buffer name, e.g. to compare it with the base names of the files visited in buffers. It is IMO better to always decorate with directional controls.