>
> > Also, please help me with another problem, I cannot get Emacs to display
> tamil supplement characters.
>
> With which font?
>

Thank you for asking the question, I had assumed that it was the Noto Sans
Tamil font, which displayed the supplement characters, but it was actually
Noto Sans Tamil Supplement.

And what do you mean by "I cannot"? what happens if
> you try?
>

When typed in Emacs they are displayed as "Tofu" characters i.e.
Rectangular Boxes with codepoint inside.

Does the font you use support those characters?  Does it support Tamil
> in general?
>

Yes the font supports the supplement characters, but does not support Tamil
in general.

> I even added a separate tamil-supplement script to
> (script-representative-chars) but nothing worked.
>
> There's no tamil-supplement script, though.


Unicode defines one, but AFAIK Emacs removes the "supplement" word from
these characters. I think it is defined in admin/unidata/blocks.awk

On Wed, Jun 1, 2022 at 6:24 PM Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:

> > From: समीर सिंह Sameer Singh <lumarzeli30@gmail.com>
> > Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2022 17:54:24 +0530
> >
> > Also, please help me with another problem, I cannot get Emacs to display
> tamil supplement characters.
>
> With which font?  And what do you mean by "I cannot"? what happens if
> you try?
>
> > I have tried adding tamil supplement codepoints to the (tamil) script of
> (script-representative-chars) function
> > in lisp/international/fontset.el
>
> Does the font you use support those characters?  Does it support Tamil
> in general?
>
> > I also added the tamil supplement codepoints to the tamil composition
> rules.
>
> Composition rules have no effect on whether a character is displayed
> as a glyph or as "tofu".
>
> > I even added a separate tamil-supplement script to
> (script-representative-chars) but nothing worked.
>
> There's no tamil-supplement script, though.
>
>   (aref char-script-table #x11fc0) => tamil
>
> See lisp/international/charscript.el, a generated file.
>
> > How can I fix this?
>
> We need first to understand the problem.
>
> P.S. I've moved this discussion out of the bug report to emacs-devel.
>