bug#8093: etags: Downcase drive letters, for consistency with Emacs proper.

bug#8093: etags: Downcase drive letters, for consistency with Emacs proper.

[Paul Eggert]

Emacs downcases drive letters when canonicalizing file names on
Microsoft Windows, but etags upcases them.  etags should be consistent
with Emacs.  I found this problem by code inspection, because there's
a macro 'upcase' that normally isn't used in etags.c; its only use is
in the section of code that upcases drive letters.  Here's a proposed
patch.

2011-02-21  Paul Eggert  <eggert@cs.ucla.edu>

	etags: Downcase drive letters, for consistency with Emacs proper.
	* etags.c (upcase): Remove; no longer used.
	(canonicalize_filename): Downcase drive letters.

--- lib-src/etags.c	2011-02-21 16:47:08.883947000 -0800
+++ /u/cs/fac/eggert/junk/etags.c	2011-02-21 21:21:04.074974000 -0800
@@ -239,7 +239,6 @@ If you want regular expression support,
  #define ISLOWER(c)	islower (CHAR(c))
  
  #define lowcase(c)	tolower (CHAR(c))
-#define upcase(c)	toupper (CHAR(c))
  
  
  /*
@@ -6638,7 +6637,7 @@ filename_is_absolute (char *fn)
  	  );
  }
  
-/* Upcase DOS drive letter and collapse separators into single slashes.
+/* Downcase DOS drive letter and collapse separators into single slashes.
     Works in place. */
  static void
  canonicalize_filename (register char *fn)
@@ -6648,8 +6647,8 @@ canonicalize_filename (register char *fn
  
  #ifdef DOS_NT
    /* Canonicalize drive letter case.  */
-  if (fn[0] != '\0' && fn[1] == ':' && ISLOWER (fn[0]))
-    fn[0] = upcase (fn[0]);
+  if (fn[0] != '\0' && fn[1] == ':' && ISUPPER (fn[0]))
+    fn[0] = downcase (fn[0]);
  
    sep = '\\';
  #endif

bug#8093: etags: Downcase drive letters, for consistency with Emacs proper.

[Francesco Potortì]

>Emacs downcases drive letters when canonicalizing file names on
>Microsoft Windows, but etags upcases them.  etags should be consistent
>with Emacs.  I found this problem by code inspection, because there's
>a macro 'upcase' that normally isn't used in etags.c; its only use is
>in the section of code that upcases drive letters.  Here's a proposed
>patch.

Looks reasonable and I see no compatibility issues.  Please install it.

>2011-02-21  Paul Eggert  <eggert@cs.ucla.edu>
>
>	etags: Downcase drive letters, for consistency with Emacs proper.
>	* etags.c (upcase): Remove; no longer used.
>	(canonicalize_filename): Downcase drive letters.
>
>--- lib-src/etags.c	2011-02-21 16:47:08.883947000 -0800
>+++ /u/cs/fac/eggert/junk/etags.c	2011-02-21 21:21:04.074974000 -0800
>@@ -239,7 +239,6 @@ If you want regular expression support,
>  #define ISLOWER(c)	islower (CHAR(c))
>  
>  #define lowcase(c)	tolower (CHAR(c))
>-#define upcase(c)	toupper (CHAR(c))
>  
>  
>  /*
>@@ -6638,7 +6637,7 @@ filename_is_absolute (char *fn)
>  	  );
>  }
>  
>-/* Upcase DOS drive letter and collapse separators into single slashes.
>+/* Downcase DOS drive letter and collapse separators into single slashes.
>     Works in place. */
>  static void
>  canonicalize_filename (register char *fn)
>@@ -6648,8 +6647,8 @@ canonicalize_filename (register char *fn
>  
>  #ifdef DOS_NT
>    /* Canonicalize drive letter case.  */
>-  if (fn[0] != '\0' && fn[1] == ':' && ISLOWER (fn[0]))
>-    fn[0] = upcase (fn[0]);
>+  if (fn[0] != '\0' && fn[1] == ':' && ISUPPER (fn[0]))
>+    fn[0] = downcase (fn[0]);
>  
>    sep = '\\';
>  #endif
>
>
>
>
>
>

bug#8093: etags: Downcase drive letters, for consistency with Emacs proper.

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2011 11:11:36 +0100
> From: Francesco Potortì= <pot@gnu.org>
> Cc: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org, owner@debbugs.gnu.org, 8093@debbugs.gnu.org
> 
> >Emacs downcases drive letters when canonicalizing file names on
> >Microsoft Windows, but etags upcases them.  etags should be consistent
> >with Emacs.  I found this problem by code inspection, because there's
> >a macro 'upcase' that normally isn't used in etags.c; its only use is
> >in the section of code that upcases drive letters.  Here's a proposed
> >patch.
> 
> Looks reasonable and I see no compatibility issues.  Please install it.

Agreed.

Thanks, Paul.

bug#8093: etags: Downcase drive letters, for consistency with Emacs proper.

[Paul Eggert]

On 02/22/2011 09:33 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> Thanks, Paul.

You're welcome, and I installed it as revno 103385
on the trunk.

bug#8093: etags: Downcase drive letters, for consistency with Emacs proper.

[Glenn Morris]

    From: Francesco Potorti <pot@gnu.org>
    Subject: bug#8093: etags: Downcase drive letters, 
        for consistency with Emacs proper.
    To: Paul Eggert <eggert@cs.ucla.edu>
    Cc: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org, owner@debbugs.gnu.org, 8093@debbugs.gnu.org


FYI, your mail client seems to be including Resent-To and Resent-Cc in
replies. Per RFC 2822, it should not do this. Eg

http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2009-01/msg00765.html

bug#8093: etags: Downcase drive letters, for consistency with Emacs proper.

[Francesco Potortì]

>    From: Francesco Potorti <pot@gnu.org>
>    Subject: bug#8093: etags: Downcase drive letters, 
>        for consistency with Emacs proper.
>    To: Paul Eggert <eggert@cs.ucla.edu>
>    Cc: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org, owner@debbugs.gnu.org, 8093@debbugs.gnu.org
>
>FYI, your mail client seems to be including Resent-To and Resent-Cc in
>replies. Per RFC 2822, it should not do this. Eg
>
>http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2009-01/msg00765.html

I use Emacs 22.3 rmail.  Unfortunately, I have a set of custom additions
to rmail which do not work with Emacs 23 and I have not yet found the
time to convert them and switch to Emacs 23 :(

bug#8093: etags: Downcase drive letters, for consistency with Emacs proper.

[Glenn Morris]

Francesco Potortì wrote:

> I use Emacs 22.3 rmail.

rmail-dont-reply-to-names should work as a stopgap.

bug#8093: etags: Downcase drive letters, for consistency with Emacs proper.

[Francesco Potortì]

>> I use Emacs 22.3 rmail.
>
>rmail-dont-reply-to-names should work as a stopgap.

I do not see how: rmail-dont-reply-to-names is a list of addresses,
while I want to prevent answering to spcific headers.

Anyway, I see the importance of this and I will modify my rmail.el,
thank you for noticing.