From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Richard M. Stallman" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Word syntax question Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2008 17:02:43 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87mygy0ybq.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <87bpxd29ft.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <8763nl1m41.fsf@catnip.gol.com> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1224709558 23077 80.91.229.12 (22 Oct 2008 21:05:58 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2008 21:05:58 +0000 (UTC) Cc: schwab@suse.de, emacs-devel@gnu.org, miles@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Oct 22 23:06:58 2008 connect(): Connection refused 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 1Kskud-0005XC-Vw for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 22 Oct 2008 23:06:40 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49940 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KsktY-0004Ab-Kb for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 22 Oct 2008 17:05:32 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KsktU-000493-7e for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Oct 2008 17:05:28 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KsktT-000483-40 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Oct 2008 17:05:27 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=56346 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KsktS-00047w-R6 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Oct 2008 17:05:26 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]:41850) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KsktS-00060i-Gk for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Oct 2008 17:05:26 -0400 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1Kskqp-0004jL-IN; Wed, 22 Oct 2008 17:02:43 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from Eli Zaretskii on Wed, 22 Oct 2008 06:29:21 +0200) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) 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:104861 Archived-At: > But a global setting seems far too course, and in general, whether it's > "right" or not seems like it depends more on the precise mixture of > scripts rather than a user's personal preferences. Not global, buffer-specific. Whether stopping or not on script boundaries depends on the specific mix of scripts in the buffer. If that is so, we need to identify the different kinds of situations, in terms of which scripts they combine and what behavior users want. Then we should try to work out a way for Emacs to recognize these situations and DTRT for each one.