From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Andreas Schwab Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: etags test is broken on MS-Windows Date: Fri, 22 May 2015 21:50:48 +0200 Message-ID: <87fv6oo0h3.fsf@igel.home> References: <83y4kmdjmj.fsf@gnu.org> <555A8E62.7060700@cs.ucla.edu> <83h9r8egen.fsf@gnu.org> <83pp5t6gex.fsf@gnu.org> <555E09AE.9070208@cs.ucla.edu> <83lhgh6fb2.fsf@gnu.org> <555E2C10.4010501@cs.ucla.edu> <83h9r5670s.fsf@gnu.org> <555E6A15.8010404@cs.ucla.edu> <831ti957wp.fsf@gnu.org> <83pp5s4uml.fsf@gnu.org> <555F740D.4030304@cs.ucla.edu> <837fs04egz.fsf@gnu.org> <87oalco1mg.fsf@igel.home> <83y4kg2yjc.fsf@gnu.org> <83wq002yct.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1432324277 26102 80.91.229.3 (22 May 2015 19:51:17 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 22 May 2015 19:51:17 +0000 (UTC) Cc: pot@gnu.org, eggert@cs.ucla.edu, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri May 22 21:51:08 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1YvsyJ-00043W-IO for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 22 May 2015 21:51:07 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:35628 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YvsyJ-00029t-3P for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 22 May 2015 15:51:07 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45833) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Yvsy7-00029i-Ia for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 22 May 2015 15:50:56 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Yvsy6-00041J-LC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 22 May 2015 15:50:55 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-out.m-online.net ([212.18.0.9]:54872) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Yvsy3-00040T-5H; Fri, 22 May 2015 15:50:51 -0400 Original-Received: from frontend01.mail.m-online.net (unknown [192.168.8.182]) by mail-out.m-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3ltdj54Dn9z3hj8d; Fri, 22 May 2015 21:50:49 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from localhost (dynscan1.mnet-online.de [192.168.6.68]) by mail.m-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3ltdj53kbYzvh2J; Fri, 22 May 2015 21:50:49 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mnet-online.de Original-Received: from mail.mnet-online.de ([192.168.8.182]) by localhost (dynscan1.mail.m-online.net [192.168.6.68]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DzxtEvczE6qU; Fri, 22 May 2015 21:50:48 +0200 (CEST) X-Auth-Info: r3wqc5IJlR5NhPsi/lsGMbC4OuiJI5nom9VM0XUDTAH+48Ad16sDI+bXGiu9vWlp Original-Received: from igel.home (ppp-93-104-62-249.dynamic.mnet-online.de [93.104.62.249]) by mail.mnet-online.de (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Fri, 22 May 2015 21:50:48 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: by igel.home (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 66AB32C35AC; Fri, 22 May 2015 21:50:48 +0200 (CEST) X-Yow: Place me on a BUFFER counter while you BELITTLE several BELLHOPS in the Trianon Room!! Let me one of your SUBSIDIARIES! In-Reply-To: <83wq002yct.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Fri, 22 May 2015 22:42:10 +0300") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 212.18.0.9 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:186743 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: > Or maybe you mean the use case where a Latin-1 file is read into an > Emacs buffer, and each non-ASCII character is expanded into a UTF-8 > sequence. Indeed, that will make the byte counts inaccurate (and > etags.el will have to compensate by searching around the specified > place). One more reason not to change anything, I guess. ??? It's exactly the counter argument. The indices in the tag file must be file offsets, everything else will lead to wrong offsets. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, schwab@linux-m68k.org GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5 "And now for something completely different."