From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jason Rumney Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: Inadequate documentation of silly characters on screen. Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 22:58:36 +0800 Message-ID: <876396tvc3.fsf@wanchan.jasonrumney.net> References: <20091118191258.GA2676@muc.de> <20091119082040.GA1720@muc.de> <874ooq8xay.fsf@wanchan.jasonrumney.net> <20091119141852.GC1720@muc.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1258643545 12106 80.91.229.12 (19 Nov 2009 15:12:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 15:12:25 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Andreas Schwab , Stefan Monnier , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Alan Mackenzie Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Nov 19 16:12:18 2009 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 4.50) id 1NB8gD-0001EZ-Pn for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 19 Nov 2009 16:12:18 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39845 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NB8gD-0006Jj-6E for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 19 Nov 2009 10:12:17 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NB8T9-0006YD-R5 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Nov 2009 09:58:47 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NB8T5-0006WC-Bw for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Nov 2009 09:58:47 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=39478 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NB8T5-0006W5-2T for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Nov 2009 09:58:43 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-fx0-f225.google.com ([209.85.220.225]:39746) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NB8T4-0007Tp-Kd for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Nov 2009 09:58:42 -0500 Original-Received: by fxm25 with SMTP id 25so2642955fxm.26 for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2009 06:58:41 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:sender:received:from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent :mime-version:content-type; bh=QBP1fYrdcu6R45kBgNaeoNPc2j8nduSFlJ1uFCewf0Y=; b=id95/PC75If3+o+yUWtPC582eY3ltPQSWPrQsTK7oSb8SBXzJLuP2Y7tEzcDDUsOA7 qZA/tLw+nTepiuzJrG/BYM25ErQmn10sPdhi/2eqtAoNoQY7YN7i+ZMdMyrydm3zti6m UNrRVQikAAyaKhr7WwmX1Uk57vAL8bDSSTucA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version:content-type; b=rOnCf5ifSSpYA9MB9RmCFDPPF/vMS8dzkZIVdDqnsfrNTROYcjKTwb9khgvoUE7aFD PpileZv4gi6bm1LBy4JpcOWmxBwSoV/KiKqmqBfYxEUc0SG27UYLro8XGyaU1Xfa7LrC xghYr9jCkwXchTuONXS5VaGaIUdLL43zJHUYk= Original-Received: by 10.204.160.73 with SMTP id m9mr36215bkx.214.1258642721528; Thu, 19 Nov 2009 06:58:41 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from wanchan.jasonrumney.net ([118.100.163.63]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 15sm208519fxm.2.2009.11.19.06.58.40 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Thu, 19 Nov 2009 06:58:40 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by wanchan.jasonrumney.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 7683A21A3; Thu, 19 Nov 2009 22:58:36 +0800 (MYT) In-Reply-To: <20091119141852.GC1720@muc.de> (Alan Mackenzie's message of "Thu, 19 Nov 2009 14:18:52 +0000") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) 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:117252 Archived-At: Alan Mackenzie writes: > At the indicated line, c is a SIGNED integer, therefore will get > the value 0xfffffff1, not 0xf1. Surely 0xf1 is the same, regardless of whether the integer is signed or unsigned. Since \361 == \xf1, I don't think this is a bug where the value is accidentally being corrupted, but one where the character is deliberately being assigned to its corresponding raw-byte codepoint.