From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Oleh Krehel Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: prin1-to-string noescape parameter Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2014 09:28:54 +0100 Message-ID: References: <87y4rwnjev.fsf@igel.home> <87a94cm07y.fsf@igel.home> <87y4rvml0f.fsf@igel.home> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1414833381 26685 80.91.229.3 (1 Nov 2014 09:16:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2014 09:16:21 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Andreas Schwab Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Nov 01 10:16:15 2014 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 1XkUn7-0001Sc-O9 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 01 Nov 2014 10:16:13 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51547 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XkUn7-0004Z8-7J for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 01 Nov 2014 05:16:13 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:44058) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XkU3M-0007ni-1G for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 01 Nov 2014 04:28:56 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XkU3L-00032j-42 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 01 Nov 2014 04:28:55 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-qa0-x236.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400d:c00::236]:54556) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XkU3K-00032d-VE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 01 Nov 2014 04:28:55 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-qa0-f54.google.com with SMTP id u7so6326636qaz.13 for ; Sat, 01 Nov 2014 01:28:54 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=u8WarK1rAuZ0U5WMmfOlOfgTZ5YyOyvI5pWIYYV/rRQ=; b=B9B409br9YVMFAWng1VsS4B9PAx7XOvEyQI3xaakqj59v7VejFi0xEV3hcSfB9dLfc vcTQpVX61F1zjr9SGoVheLAxSdXqav4BX71SGCJycF2XFRMLrUzatDwttx3GTPfbHPTW Rtt1ZcdrJYNbNfKPHiTh7ymFjKHUXxO5f3hD4yUQEI7FfQKB04G9HrUPIfLrFL7VRlSB WErE2FAIxc3h9ROavyKVCdh3GCOMX+jq2Nh4yxh7XS4UCUHiDCq0WiPFfPz18rFzeO8a 0gz2O54rk9TUPD1TsV665fBG931UCq5b8Mf2SdnyvkIvXN+E63pGSbIkMKT25G9eVpU1 O77w== X-Received: by 10.140.36.168 with SMTP id p37mr3022212qgp.101.1414830534406; Sat, 01 Nov 2014 01:28:54 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.140.101.215 with HTTP; Sat, 1 Nov 2014 01:28:54 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87y4rvml0f.fsf@igel.home> X-Google-Sender-Auth: Cwy3evwnMQNiOSvTxlj8qesvp7k X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2607:f8b0:400d:c00::236 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sat, 01 Nov 2014 05:15:59 -0400 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:176196 Archived-At: >>>> The issue is that if I have `foo.bar` in the code, and then I re-format >>>> my code by: >>>> >>>> - read text >>>> - delete text >>>> - manipulate lisp object >>>> - insert manipulated lisp object >>>> >>>> And now my code contains `foo\.bar`, although I don't want it. >>> >>> By passing the text through the lisp reading you are discarding all >>> redundancy, so it is impossible in general to get back the original >>> representation. >> >> Not possible in general, but the thing that I want can be done >> by changing slightly the condition at line 240 of print.c > > No, you can't. You have already discarded all necessary information. Of course it's possible. Since `foo.bar' and `foo\.bar' is the same symbol, why not print it as "foo.bar" always? It looks better like this in the source code anyway, and the reader has no problem with it. regards, Oleh