From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stephen Berman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#11339: 24.1.50; read-{buffer,file-name}-completion-ignore-case fails on non-ascii Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2019 19:02:15 +0100 Message-ID: <875zjzy0yg.fsf@gmx.net> References: <87ehrbyg8t.fsf@escher.home> <87lfszxtcl.fsf@marxist.se> <83bltvl55x.fsf@gnu.org> <87o8xvz0hp.fsf@gmx.net> <83tv7mkb0l.fsf@gnu.org> <87d0ea9uxg.fsf@gmx.net> <83eeyphr5q.fsf@gnu.org> <87lfsvyd4i.fsf@gmx.net> <87h83jy5kp.fsf@gmx.net> <83v9rzh8gs.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="191625"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: 11339@debbugs.gnu.org, stefan@marxist.se To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Nov 04 19:03:30 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iRghO-000niy-J2 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 04 Nov 2019 19:03:30 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:36094 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iRghM-0005Po-NT for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 04 Nov 2019 13:03:28 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:38777) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iRggy-0005Na-6e for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 04 Nov 2019 13:03:05 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iRggw-0001BB-Rx for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 04 Nov 2019 13:03:03 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:56904) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iRggw-0001B6-OC for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 04 Nov 2019 13:03:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iRggw-00046R-IX for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 04 Nov 2019 13:03:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Stephen Berman Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2019 18:03:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 11339 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 11339-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B11339.157289055215732 (code B ref 11339); Mon, 04 Nov 2019 18:03:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 11339) by debbugs.gnu.org; 4 Nov 2019 18:02:32 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37492 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iRggR-00045f-Od for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 04 Nov 2019 13:02:32 -0500 Original-Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.15]:35771) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iRggP-00045P-SY for 11339@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 04 Nov 2019 13:02:30 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1572890539; bh=fzbMrK+yQDjoB+fizkQdzPJ1bQDXlNUle8EqccVe+/Q=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To; b=ihVi4Qk5ujTZV6NDFuKh13I2QgcAKFoOj7ooRt1iyTsi17HXZxFft0JSz0+D73Zsr H9bvfQQLoO2sU09L+8oEB0vamKkUCq9z+09zVNAZJIzWhh45FkkQ5Bh5oFoN6uCYbe 8LOtHtV8zBNb1CHQlhbMWuzRalp+yZIGTSrrd6A4= X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c Original-Received: from strobe-lfs84 ([188.109.197.143]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx004 [212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1N6KYl-1hqciY0Ji5-016fLC; Mon, 04 Nov 2019 19:02:19 +0100 In-Reply-To: <83v9rzh8gs.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Mon, 04 Nov 2019 19:12:03 +0200") X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:qF1s/syxi1MMaDV2Cg2C2bJLD4Osd2DkftPB4gRQKUCRaAK6zRw SSRTEohAJti1I+b1Bx04GOrlxf22c8WIqBoFjH5ljrtP+YyNNNQ2q7i1By0nprWJYDDpXWv XCYZZOzS9iVrigibyZmll7W+fC9okfyFTaO2cQIi7m0mgZMQF7NhzrfcwcHkZW+8CheUnRT 5AWF23GHTcwtGmMCqPAAg== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:uctbYhDvPsE=:yfEhydjPkN7Jpx0lWe270E FNvxxgXnRgYZq8OG+UJRYjMvbVdH9m3J/bjt0pzYbNc0/xfwfDnSO47O9mgfGwA0Sx8yG++gU DvBCzRVwwZK7AmuskrBo5lS1Qdlk6pNVuz9dY1ie3DM4PsxiWpb7s3yN+eE0f9BMX4mXHA4O6 S17wDMLNT+6698tzEa+yxznw2v9ZQveqUb0hx1b8ZkweIzVkNcKEw3M/O+IRb8Q6d+3XOaeUg lm0zu/l1oZte9cpW6JC+krmIjsvG83TlV2IcOipiU3tPNFSiSgufNGXhJ2HlZ0eg7N88KnPp1 Rg643pSrCPhy2TtPIsyVUg6XCSxGVj+gBzttpEv0ytY8xHnTMl3LMt0IyE9jk/2mSvt7AUcqf 7PDC7XeoKhie4OCRoNQCYRTg0qx74U65ptwrcmxH6v1Y3ACTbqo3GA3HxhBDG/viaWYVTm4EO roCKyC99s8m1lmXH5cZCU303kz3kPvjKU0QJLdWxNLASqRKw+GKnWwalIFh0/ZDSCbre/UQjh Klcq4ED1cykV6+l8b/w/gHlwgy35COby1WciplajpdtMGWXwKdJ0LW/BPEc98DkiRpbOht3Vc PTbYQTUEN5CWffxheeaUmk1TntkuJwSDghVptFcXqBOcfyyO/PRYeylrir+6qeIW5POx26/6f Nd5R5Ws4RSrp6Kz/RKX78WFVB1NsFFRDdHP7zjnl4d+gXKHnWAeWrl4TsGxEDTBSt5XWzcoUq rZ7k14KAh4rsGlfCeEbSam8DZgkvJ+PFLlSJU9q5dqHmI2aUpJFDOszK/Vu0iEW04rrKmq4P X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 209.51.188.43 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:170949 Archived-At: On Mon, 04 Nov 2019 19:12:03 +0200 Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> From: Stephen Berman >> Cc: stefan@marxist.se, 11339@debbugs.gnu.org >> Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2019 17:22:30 +0100 >>=20 >> After your fix: >>=20 >> 1. $ emacs-master -Q --eval '(setq read-buffer-completion-ignore-case t= read-file-name-completion-ignore-case t)' /tmp/{bah,bAh,b=C3=A4h,b=C3=84h} >> (*Buffer List* show the buffers bah,bAh,b=C3=A4h,b=C3=84h) >> 2. C-x b *scratch* >> 3a. C-x b ba TAB >> =3D> completes to bah and after TAB displays [Sole completion] >> 3b. C-g C-x b bA TAB >> =3D> completes to bAh and after TAB displays [Sole completion] >> 4a. C-g C-x b b=C3=A4 TAB >> =3D> completes to b=C3=A4h and after TAB displays [Sole completion] >> 4b. C-g C-x b b=C3=84 TAB >> =3D> completes to b=C3=84h and after TAB displays [Sole completion] >> 5a. C-g C-x C-f /tmp/ba TAB >> =3D> completes to bah and after TAB displays [Complete, but not uniqu= e] >> and *Completions* pops up showing `bAh' and `bah' >> 5b. C-g C-x C-f /tmp/bA TAB >> =3D> completes to bAh and after TAB displays [Complete, but not uniqu= e] >> and *Completions* pops up showing `bAh' and `bah' >> 6a. C-g C-x C-f /tmp/b=C3=A4 TAB >> =3D> completes to /tmp/b=C3=A4h and after TAB displays [Complete, but= not unique] >> and *Completions* pops up showing `bAh' and `bah' >> 6a. C-g C-x C-f /tmp/b=C3=84 TAB >> =3D> completes to /tmp/b=C3=84h and after TAB displays [Complete, but= not unique] >> and *Completions* pops up showing `bAh' and `bah' >>=20 >> So, before your fix file name completion involving non-ASCII strings >> behaved the same as buffer name completion involving both ASCII-only and >> non-ASCII strings, but file name completion involving ASCII-only strings >> differed. Now, after your fix, file name completion involving non-ASCII >> strings works the same as file name completion involving ASCII-only >> strings did before your fix and still does after, but all the cases of >> file name completion differ from the corresponding cases of buffer name >> completion. I would prefer buffer name completion to work the way file >> name completion uniformly works after your fix. > > "You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike." > > (I'm confused by a dozen of similar examples which don't say which > result is deemed to be correct and which isn't.) > > Previously, you said that buffer-name completion works correctly,=20 I don't think so. In my OP of this bug I reported the results of `C-x b' as incorrect (step 8 of the recipe there). In my followup a year later, I reiterated that the "bug still exists" but added a different observation of correct behavior involving `C-x b' but incorrect behavior involving `C-x C-f'. After Stefan Kangas's post revisiting this bug, which only looked at the `C-x b' behavior of my OP, you implied the behavior is correct and said you see no bug, to which I replied with what I intended to be a clarification of my OP, but it seems to have confused you; my followup to that unfortunately seems to have added to the confusion concerning the behavior of `C-x b', for which I apologize. But I hope and think my last reply quoted above is clear: "all the cases of file name completion differ from the corresponding cases of buffer name completion. I would prefer buffer name completion to work the way file name completion uniformly works after your fix." To phrase it in terms of correctness: the results of `C-x b' in steps 3-4 quoted above are incorrect; they should be the same as the results of `C-x C-f' in steps 5-6, which are correct (IMO). Steve Berman