From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: evaluating numbers Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2019 08:52:06 -0500 Message-ID: References: <875zjw2emg.fsf@gmx.net> <618B38D9-CD34-4200-8CA1-1A6B0922A83A@traduction-libre.org> <871ruk2d3f.fsf@gmx.net> <3C929D7B-1C10-4713-9EDA-55C80FC36AD8@traduction-libre.org> <835zjvg385.fsf@gnu.org> <83sgmyd6rw.fsf@gnu.org> <835zjucwbz.fsf@gnu.org> <628A3663-BDD3-47C5-B4F4-E260FD900691@traduction-libre.org> <83o8xla50f.fsf@gnu.org> <3396E071-2338-43A2-AB7D-62A5022F5FAD@traduction-libre.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="96173"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: Emacs development discussions To: Jean-Christophe Helary Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Nov 14 14:52:29 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iVFXw-000Os2-45 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 14 Nov 2019 14:52:28 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:57822 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iVFXu-00061w-Ot for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 14 Nov 2019 08:52:26 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:38436) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iVFXo-00061m-7N for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 14 Nov 2019 08:52:21 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iVFXm-0000lX-5C for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 14 Nov 2019 08:52:19 -0500 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:37694) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iVFXl-0000lH-Lm for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 14 Nov 2019 08:52:18 -0500 Original-Received: from pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id B902E100427; Thu, 14 Nov 2019 08:52:16 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 374DC10028B; Thu, 14 Nov 2019 08:52:15 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1573739535; bh=9S/q+PyLpVPDLjz/YS6/Bmi5H1x0XkckURTYH770r9w=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=X9RmwUJRGwLkAhxWTXx1VYowSoa1Nvt0akZsp8Hbsby8sItB8uTLzOUGUX01r1Ssh GXku39WH+sVU74MBMOoPyCQHnXiw2W6RIIDvo/gQ/0siREfZbzLKh2sD5LgZ/tkmHu cK7fCQIC9SsIo2r9Sh48Hl8z0OAx1F8tazI//YO8BM0JioDzmijctJZSPzeA2l/kRW yThkceJEqlXsAlIwwYsMtOxnc2i6AgK/LIEH/WHd6PcVGyyiEQ4GV7lko2sjnqkMbn pCVK9bQzv52b4T7x9PEZOwjQw6FcZmvDRy/khPcbiCWzS0hkDAg9M0mYHsDc49pyN2 HAFoKrnmr8/XQ== Original-Received: from pastel (206-248-133-142.dsl.teksavvy.com [206.248.133.142]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F272B120764; Thu, 14 Nov 2019 08:52:14 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <3396E071-2338-43A2-AB7D-62A5022F5FAD@traduction-libre.org> (Jean-Christophe Helary's message of "Thu, 14 Nov 2019 08:02:09 +0900") X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 132.204.25.50 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:242156 Archived-At: > No. I'm suggesting that the developer who wrote that code and that > documentation is creating expectations by using the word "character" and > thus could have implemented the function so that it returns a "character", > or a "glyph" (which are synonymous) and not only its code point. Emacs Lisp doesn't have a separate "character" data type (contrary to XEmacs) and uses their integer code points for that instead. As for glyphs, we do have some such notion, but it's different from a character so wouldn't be appropriate here either. >> For "discoverability" (or "cognitive gap reduction") purposes, I'd rather have something like >> 1114111 (#o4177777, #x10ffff, t) Maybe it would be helpful to you, but I don't think it will be helpful in general. The naive user will just wonder why there's a "t" in there (I can already foresee the questions and discussions on gnu.emacs.help and friends). And in my experience it's extremely rare to have to wonder "is this integer a valid char". So adding a ", t" for this very rare situation doesn't make much sense. Stefan