From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Oliver Scholz Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [PATCH] Unicode Lisp reader escapes Date: Sat, 06 May 2006 17:01:12 +0200 Message-ID: References: <17491.34779.959316.484740@parhasard.net> <87odyfnqcj.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org> <17498.27200.911709.330947@parhasard.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1146927767 15285 80.91.229.2 (6 May 2006 15:02:47 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 6 May 2006 15:02:47 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Richard Stallman Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat May 06 17:02:44 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FcOIs-0005T6-J1 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 06 May 2006 17:02:42 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FcOIs-0001Op-M1 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 06 May 2006 11:02:42 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FcOIe-0001Oa-V1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 06 May 2006 11:02:29 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FcOId-0001OO-H8 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 06 May 2006 11:02:28 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FcOId-0001OL-BU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 06 May 2006 11:02:27 -0400 Original-Received: from [80.91.229.2] (helo=ciao.gmane.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA:32) (Exim 4.52) id 1FcOJ1-0007oP-Sw for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 06 May 2006 11:02:52 -0400 Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1FcOIX-0005RW-Jz for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 06 May 2006 17:02:21 +0200 Original-Received: from dslb-084-058-178-184.pools.arcor-ip.net ([84.58.178.184]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 06 May 2006 17:02:21 +0200 Original-Received: from alkibiades by dslb-084-058-178-184.pools.arcor-ip.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 06 May 2006 17:02:21 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-Lines: 31 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: dslb-084-058-178-184.pools.arcor-ip.net User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/23.0.0 (gnu/linux) 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:54008 Archived-At: Richard Stallman writes: > I guess, you have a similar problem when the source file is encoded in > either ISO 8859-5 or ISO 8859-7 (btw., what about Hewbrew, Arabic and > Thai?). Unless I am much mistaken, the encoding of the characters in > the .elc file would also depend on the value of > `utf-fragment-on-decoding'. [Note the correction in a follow-up of mine: I made a mistake in phrasing that paragraph. I am actually talking about Elisp source files encoded in UTF-8 (or another UCS encoding) that contain characters from the repertoire of ISO 8859-5 or ISO 8859-7. There's a similar case with source files encoded in some of the ISO 8859 encodings and `unify-8859-on-decoding-mode', though.] > Are you talking about how the compiler would write the .elc file? > Or are you talking about how the .elc file would be interpreted? It's the former. Meanwhile I have tested it. After some more thought I think that the case of an UTF-8 encoded source files containing characters from the Greek or Cyrillic repertoires is in fact entirely analogous to what would happen with \u. In other words: that particular bug is already there. Oliver, who still thinks that \u and \U is really ugly. -- 17 Floréal an 214 de la Révolution Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité!