From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: master b8062be 3/5: Remove some compat code from eudc-bob.el Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2020 15:02:07 -0400 Message-ID: References: <20200812175454.4839.92908@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <20200812175456.C5D122172E@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <874kp7lpda.fsf@gnus.org> <87mu2zhssl.fsf@gnus.org> <83imdmn0vr.fsf@gnu.org> <835z9mmy4t.fsf@gnu.org> <83364qmr7f.fsf@gnu.org> <83zh6yl7wr.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="31291"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Aug 13 21:02:57 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1k6IV6-00083V-U9 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 13 Aug 2020 21:02:56 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:42538 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1k6IV5-0004pD-Tn for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 13 Aug 2020 15:02:55 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:43232) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1k6IUS-0004Os-Cg for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 13 Aug 2020 15:02:16 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:20907) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1k6IUO-00046X-BE; Thu, 13 Aug 2020 15:02:15 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id E118F101918; Thu, 13 Aug 2020 15:02:09 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id C376F1012C0; Thu, 13 Aug 2020 15:02:07 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1597345327; bh=hXEshdauzD3y9CtKCk5Ali2Ur9W3cAlLg3ZFiyMLyIo=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=bJhsdoAByZtlZ55u1UXOK9J7CdfWcB6+8BFrri5Ar7bxCTt4mDCVGr1bg7F8kadaP xpXyzOM/vRA8MKR+excSBTb6kQ/EH8usXTxh+ymh1fe7beOjDi+CUGAQTAUkHXUgus e+v/9uQYuvNhmqoDOy9i2EbDBwD0qSR+ZuIjC96CN+ObEYDJANBAg5X0YcoyXarL7T ITCjMBy94HgOJ3+/hV5DGBD4aEylinT8yHp14HBepUvfF5LkpJPtQdKO5pXbYsgnMd 3RTMQQWcixDKELzQL9GDIZxOiSEbLAOeMcw5HzRX77+QgPcTr0PfSsZ4zJnP7zKo8S t6qV8H/ur02uA== Original-Received: from alfajor (unknown [45.72.246.108]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 95F08120538; Thu, 13 Aug 2020 15:02:07 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <83zh6yl7wr.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Thu, 13 Aug 2020 21:25:56 +0300") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/08/13 13:43:58 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Spam_score_int: -42 X-Spam_score: -4.3 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:253745 Archived-At: >> > In unibyte buffers the coding-system doesn't matter. > Again, this factoid isn't relevant to the issue at hand. Not sure what is the issue at hand at this point, so I replied to what you wrote. >> > For a multibyte buffer, it's dangerous. >> So you say, but again: Do you know a less "dangerous" alternative? > Yes: encode using UTF-8. AFAIK the UTF-8 spec does not specify how to encode "byte chars" (like our eight-bit chars), so if you (think you) have only bytes in your multibyte buffer (i.e. only ascii and eight-bit chars), using utf-8 is rather strange and oddly dangerous since you're relying on some corner-case detail of our utf-8 coding-system. Stefan