From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jesper Harder Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: UUIDGEN in lisp Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 17:30:10 +0100 Organization: http://purl.org/harder/ Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1076950197 2201 80.91.224.253 (16 Feb 2004 16:49:57 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 16:49:57 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Feb 16 17:49:46 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from hermes.netfonds.no ([80.91.224.195]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1AslwF-00007y-00 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 17:49:46 +0100 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org (monty-python.gnu.org [199.232.76.173]) by hermes.netfonds.no (8.12.8p1/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i1GGnZOn022686 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 17:49:35 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1Asltr-0003HG-Hf for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 11:47:15 -0500 Original-Path: shelby.stanford.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news.tele.dk!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!not-for-mail Original-Newsgroups: gnu.emacs.help X-Face: ^RrvqCr7c,P$zTR:QED"@h9+BTm-"fjZJJ-3=OU7.)i/K]<.J88}s>'Z_$r; List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:16907 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.help:16907 "Eli Zaretskii" writes: > Jesper, can you explain why did you need all these monstrocities > with coding-system-for-read Binding coding-system-for-read is definitely necessary. I'm reading random bytes, and I don't want Emacs to convert any of the values. If I don't bind it, `uuid-random' can return a list like: (159 92 2210 119 150 148 2275 2265 2290 2220 2240 62 84 2235 150 18) which is wrong, since it's not a list of bytes. > and string-as-unibyte? string-as-unibyte is probably unnecessary. > Is there some real problem behind this, or simply a bit of paranoia > (no offense)? What am I missing? Uhm, I don't think there's anything strange about having to bind coding-system-for-read to binary -- I _am_ reading binary data, after all.