From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Miles Bader Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: character composition seems much worse than before Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2010 12:40:47 +0900 Message-ID: Reply-To: Miles Bader NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1289187670 4410 80.91.229.12 (8 Nov 2010 03:41:10 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 03:41:10 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Nov 08 04:41:06 2010 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 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PFIbS-0001wJ-GK for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 08 Nov 2010 04:41:06 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:51446 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PFIbS-0005ht-0z for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 07 Nov 2010 22:41:06 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=57700 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PFIbI-0005hQ-Nh for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 07 Nov 2010 22:41:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PFIbH-0005gu-Pz for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 07 Nov 2010 22:40:56 -0500 Original-Received: from tyo202.gate.nec.co.jp ([202.32.8.206]:38963) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PFIbF-0005dP-ES; Sun, 07 Nov 2010 22:40:53 -0500 Original-Received: from mailgate3.nec.co.jp ([10.7.69.160]) by tyo202.gate.nec.co.jp (8.13.8/8.13.4) with ESMTP id oA83emVs020239; Mon, 8 Nov 2010 12:40:48 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: (from root@localhost) by mailgate3.nec.co.jp (8.11.7/3.7W-MAILGATE-NEC) id oA83emn11380; Mon, 8 Nov 2010 12:40:48 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: from relay21.aps.necel.com ([10.29.19.50]) by vgate02.nec.co.jp (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id oA83d9Ft002890; Mon, 8 Nov 2010 12:40:48 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: from relay21.aps.necel.com ([10.29.19.20] [10.29.19.20]) by relay21.aps.necel.com with ESMTP; Mon, 8 Nov 2010 12:40:48 +0900 Original-Received: from dhlpc061 ([10.114.96.148] [10.114.96.148]) by relay21.aps.necel.com with ESMTP; Mon, 8 Nov 2010 12:40:48 +0900 Original-Received: by dhlpc061 (Postfix, from userid 31295) id DF3A052E1BB; Mon, 8 Nov 2010 12:40:47 +0900 (JST) System-Type: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu Blat: Foop Original-Lines: 60 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 8 (1) 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:132434 Archived-At: For a while, maybe 4-5 months ago (?), automatic composition in Emacs seemed to be working really well -- things just _worked_, and worked correctly in almost every case. Now it seems to be a fair bit worse... E.g.: I do (using emacs -Q, latest trunk): (1) Insert a letter "e" by typing it (2) Insert a unicode combinging accute accent by doing "C-x 8 RET" and then "COMBINING ACCUTE ACCENT" RET *Previously* (meaning N months ago), that would then properly display an accented "e" character, which looked exactly like the precombined unicode "=E9". Perfect! One could even add multiple combining accents and they all displayed correctly stacked on top of each other. It was impressive. But now: + It doesn't work by default -- it seems that I need to do "M-x auto-composition-mode" first. Why is this necessary? Aren't combining characters almost always intended to, well, combine? Why would we want them to _not_ combine by default? + The accent positioning is fairly clearly wrong. I know this is font-specific, but this is using "Bitstream Vera Sans Mono" which is a pretty standard free font, and with which the positioning seemed to be perfect before. + Some combining accents seem to simply not work at all. If I insert an "e", and then a "COMBINING CIRCUMFLEX ACCENT" character, the latter simply displays as a separate character, not stacked on top of the "e". This used to work properly (and is a legimate combination -- there's a precombined "LATIN SMALL LETTER E WITH CIRCUMFLEX" character. + Multiple combining accents seem to display very badly, not stacked properly, but instead seemingly all at the same location (resulting in an unreadable blob). This also used to work "properly." Maybe there's something wrong with my system or my font, but I think it's a reasonably standard Debian distro, with a standard font... Do these things work for other people? [Well, I guess the question of whether "auto-composition-mode" is valid regardless.] Thanks, -Miles --=20 Patience, n. A minor form of despair, disguised as a virtue.