From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Garreau\, Alexandre" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: Getting Emacs to play nice with Hunspell and apostrophes Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 04:21:07 +0200 Message-ID: References: <87ha3s71mt.fsf@debian.uxu> <87tx7rsevi.fsf@debian.uxu> <8738fbscao.fsf@debian.uxu> <8738f8w988.fsf@debian.uxu> <8761k3vj2y.fsf@debian.uxu> <8761k3tqoo.fsf@debian.uxu> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1402971704 32186 80.91.229.3 (17 Jun 2014 02:21:44 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 02:21:44 +0000 (UTC) Cc: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org To: Emanuel Berg Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jun 17 04:21:39 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Wwj1m-00077U-IC for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 17 Jun 2014 04:21:38 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:47005 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Wwj1m-0000E8-1R for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 16 Jun 2014 22:21:38 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:37012) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Wwj1V-0000E3-Bu for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 16 Jun 2014 22:21:26 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Wwj1P-0004n0-Vt for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 16 Jun 2014 22:21:21 -0400 Original-Received: from bar75-1-78-192-124-148.fbxo.proxad.net ([78.192.124.148]:48703 helo=galex-713.eu) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Wwj1P-0004mw-LB for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 16 Jun 2014 22:21:15 -0400 Original-Received: from PC-713 (71.45.142.88.rev.sfr.net [88.142.45.71]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) (Authenticated sender: galex-713) by galex-713.eu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 10C1815F7ED; Tue, 17 Jun 2014 04:21:14 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=galex-713.eu; s=dkim; t=1402971674; bh=P20rVuLgnKomrRzlIWZa8d1AV/dF5KAq4QlF5X20EN0=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=E6ZXMi0kR8fYI03BPcbY127RWBNiHjT+aqrRWfuPFU+REfl4sBtBoa1EvK8pBfXQW jKGy9fuwWubZlaAsaoJ+chEpIK8g00dOG5FmNLMghwyNn+EKs9zxYTri/8PGDACj3e S3/cCDYwNT2SEoSA1/84fHY6dCSTS0sPpNVhj0dQ= User-Agent: Gnus (5.13), GNU Emacs 24.3.50.1 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Face: iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAADAAAAAwCAMAAABg3Am1AAAABGdBTUEAALGPC/xhBQAAADBQ TFRFAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAQEBAQEBAgICBAQEFRUV////////////////////////2mBkLQAA ABB0Uk5TAAAAAAAAAAABCU2g0Pr+/CTJwSkAAAABYktHRACIBR1IAAABkUlEQVRIx82W0XLEIAhF nbx5QfP/f1sVUVSStvvSOrObrOEI1yBsuH45wl8AAHEdRMD3QDHOZjDhFQClvI20IRaIYl5Wvdu1 e0uIPgDWBVGuhYW6ZHhAsxf/5Y6ofCTKlQjWPsl8cZBRvlhCQbJEMPY6S9U2coupE7R7iMa+rkgN o/FmDg0Y8fSI1qljl5CGf3Gm0p8A414dtBuOPlAcTO+koVi3G7A4SOMHeTGFHi2OiB5khx7sZSXH eU8PwCKZjJxDdpB5K9kNbwGMhJY386kTkwB39NcsP294QDKS7caYPfYB5NeRDg30DvAO1AgSL8PM TGBsK+UjZHPwJqAvrkre970WEDgAq2TeU2FkIE1ARZDzYkcG6is16d0kH0DspwJml/oBQnbPpGRg 08fLEfUkz2xBXoCWAp5kzcBicFtAcwIeUGVzW9AAkaROu4DUdCxAL8V+l5JyvAG2GO8e5MkO2HJ/ NCXGdQLSCbYOZRrKCVwR2rJquUbtpmm2rNhmH5tiSj9oih+03Q8a+z/4c/IFGNsy9Qwqrr0AAAAA SUVORK5CYII= X-Home-Page: https://www.galex-713.eu X-GPG-FINGERPRINT: E109 9988 4197 D7CB B0BC 5C23 8DEB 24BA 867D 3F7F X-GPG: 0x8DEB24BA867D3F7F X-Accept-Language: fr, it, en In-Reply-To: <8761k3tqoo.fsf@debian.uxu> (Emanuel Berg's message of "Sat, 14 Jun 2014 18:13:27 +0200") X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 78.192.124.148 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor 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 Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:98294 Archived-At: --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2014-06-14 at 18:13, Emanuel Berg wrote: > Yuri Khan writes: >>>> Curly quotes (and, in Russian print tradition, double angle quotes) >>>> are what I am used to seeing in print and consider to be the >>>> correct way to write >>> OK, I believe you. However, the point I made with all people coming >>> from different cultures is that it doesn't matter where we are from >>> individually. When I went to school, I suppose I was most >>> comfortable with Swedish. But I'm not supposing we all switch to >>> Swedish! >> >> OK, so what? I expect that people of all cultures who were exposed to >> books printed before the advent of the computer and the word >> processor are used to typographic characters. > > I'm OK disagreeing but I want you to understand me. The point is: the > cultures are in this discussion irrelevant. If the cultures were what > decided things you should be speaking Russian and I Swedish. As we still do, most of our time. > We don't, because we have travelled to a common point so that when we > interact in the computer world, we are using the =E2=80=9CComputer Englis= h=E2=80=9D > language, which I have described several times now. No, we travelled to a common point where colonialism and oppression imposed English as a poor (for that purpose) international language we all make decades of more or less hard work to poorly learn (that=E2=80=99s = less visible when we write, but that=E2=80=99s really visible when we speak). Wh= ile we could just more think to constructed languages that we make some weeks or months to perfectly speak (and however, it were demonstrated it takes less time learning Esperanto and *then* English than just learning English alone). > This is the English in the man pages, in the RFCs, Oh, good point. But let=E2=80=99s agree to disagree on this standard of standards. > in the C code, Let=E2=80=99s bet how much time again C will stay around=E2=80=A6 before we= move to something more powerful (some interesting ideas: ), that we could make more neutral, or even where we could move syntactic representation of content separated of content itself (like MVC) and move complexity from the compiler toward the editor (and just letting the compiler doing things like JIT, native code caching or on-the-fly optimization). > in the HTML, and all that. In this language you don't write > if you are Swedish, if you are British, etc. *all* write >
, otherwise it doesn't work! Because HTML is not language-neutral. But if you think HTML (and more generally XML, and even more generally things based on XML like XMPP) is well made and really efficient, you have some problems. > Likewise, to quote in Usenet post we use >, to double quote, >>, and > so on; to mark where the signature starts we use --, because otherwise > highlighting/hiding of the quotes/signature doesn't work, because the > clients are looking for those specific chars! Yes, standards. But standards aren=E2=80=99t necessarily not language-neutral. Just like TCP/IP *is* a world wide standard and *is* language-neutral (since it=E2=80=99s binary, for performance and simplicity reasons). > In =E2=80=9CComputer English=E2=80=9D, the de facto standard is ' and ", = and it > doesn't matter what books anyone read as kids. Yes it matters, because here we speak English, not a programming language that=E2=80=99s based on English. > Because we are not doing that *now*! All of us have moved to a common > culture which is common for practical reasons For causes, but not for reasons. Otherwise we would be speaking a Lojban with a more logical alphabet and base 12. > =E2=80=94=C2=A0it is not aesthetics or snobbism, it is reality=C2=A0=E2= =80=94 It is tradition. But when tradition stays too much time reality we have a problem. > and there is no reason whatsoever to fight it. Efficiency, readability, etc. all these things that help to increase our every-days freedom. >>> OK, that's a ridiculous example as it is extreme, while what we >>> discuss now is perhaps trivial (' or ) =E2=80=94=C2=A0but in principle = it is the >>> same. The computer language is English, and as I showed=C2=A0=E2=80=94 = the man >>> pages for ls and emacs, as well as the RFC excerpt, as well as all >>> experience with mails and Usenet and programming culture =E2=80=94=C2= =A0all show >>> that in =E2=80=9CComputer English=E2=80=9D, ' (not ) is correct. >> >> They are that way because they were written in the dark age of ten >> thousand code pages and never updated to Unicode. > > It doesn't matter. That's the way it is. Like the sentence I just > wrote. I don't care why the English word for =E2=80=9Cway=E2=80=9D is =E2= =80=9Cway=E2=80=9D. Just as people don=E2=80=99t care about what=E2=80=99s an operating system,= a cli, etc. > It just is, Yeah, it is magical. Just as people consider computers, you consider language. Except language is really a more general and important thing than just =E2=80=9Ccomputing=E2=80=9D. Because the notion of =E2=80=9Clangu= age=E2=80=9D include many concept of =E2=80=9Ccomputing=E2=80=9D. > and it is very, very unpractical and extremely arrogant for anyone to > say, I don't like it to be =E2=80=9Cway=E2=80=9D, for no reason whatsoeve= r save for > aesthetics (which isn't a consensus by the way) I like it to be =E2=80=9C= yaw=E2=80=9D Esperantists, and Lojbanists, and all people working on language are doing that =E2=80=9Carrogant=E2=80=9D thing, and they proved it is a lot mo= re practical than what people do by default =E2=80=94that to say: almost nothing. > - and the argument for changing, is that there are (of course!) > historical roots for the word =E2=80=9Cway=E2=80=9D being =E2=80=9Cway=E2= =80=9D =E2=80=94=C2=A0if someone had > thought about it really hard (and exactly like me, today) he or she > would have decided the word for =E2=80=9Cway=E2=80=9D should be =E2=80=9C= yaw=E2=80=9D=C2=A0=E2=80=94 it doesn't > make any sense! Yes it doesn=E2=80=99t, and that=E2=80=99s a reason for changing. Because w= e=E2=80=99re doing a lot of unpractical things every days, and changing, =E2=80=9Cprogressing=E2= =80=9D allows us to gain more freedom. >> They exist *because* there was a certain technical >> limitation in the last fifty years or so. Since this >> limitation has been removed, there is no reason for >> them. > > They do not exist because there was a technical > limitation fifty years ago. They exist, today, because > they are useful, today! No, they=E2=80=99re useless and unpractical, they always were, and they alw= ays will. >> I believe users of the VGA text console are >> intelligent beings and respect their decision to >> suffer. > > Forget it. I have Gnus configured to transparently > replace your goofy chars with the correct ones. Thanks for the idea, I=E2=80=99m going to do the opposite. How did you do? >> therefore, the Web must do all things books do, and >> then some. > > The web can already do that in principle but that > doesn't mean books, papers, libraries, and so on will > disappear. That's a horrible thought but luckily it > won't happen. Just as *calligraphy* didn=E2=80=99t disappear with printer invention. But = since you need *one lifetime* to write a calligraphied big book (let=E2=80=99s sa= y, some documentation), and since there=E2=80=99s a *looooooot* more interesti= ng things to do (just like reading all sorts of the really interesting things human beings can write all across the globe), we just *all* read printed books. For the same reasons, we will *almost* (but like calligraphy, some will continue for the sake of the art, and =E2=80=9Csnobbism and aesthetics=E2= =80=9D just like you like to say) stop to print books as soon as printers will stop being obsessed with money, editors with proprietary coercion, and computer makers to not-pluggable OLED screens (planned obsolescence and profit optimization) and eInk patents. >> If I have to read a printed document, every straight >> quote, every hyphen used in place of a dash, every >> uneven space, pulls me out of the flow. The only way >> for me to stop thinking about the characters is if >> they are exactly as in a book typeset by a skilled >> typesetter on a pre-computer-era press. > > Yes, this is only snobbism and aesthetics for the sake of it. All this is just studied for readability, to read better, to read quicker, to read the more. That=E2=80=99s pragmatism. >>> when you program and write in English (like now), >>> don't you use the US keyboard layout? That's what I >>> do to get the brackets and the semicolon and all >>> that with no fuss - it is not that I use the Swedish >>> chars that much, anyway! (Which is again the whole >>> point.) And with the US layout, ' (and so on) are >>> easier to type than the chars you suggest. >> >> The difference between ' and AltGr+' is almost >> negligible for me. > > We don't have to "almost" that: ' is one key, AltGr+' > is two. But you press AltGr with the thumb, and the thumb is made to be moved without disturbing the rest of the hand (you know, to *take* objects, that thing monkeys and primates can and other mammals can=E2=80=99t) so whe= n you use your thumb to use a modifier it is biomechanically equivalent to just press one key, not two. That=E2=80=99s the reason why more modifiers s= hould be near the thumb. >> I do understand we have engaged in a holy war not >> directly related to the original posters >> problem. Lets agree to disagree. > > The OP had a problem because he used the incorrect > chars. While the spellchecker still should cope, I > still haven't heard one argument that makes sense why > anyone should benefit from those goofy chars. Because they make text more readable and understandable. Then you can disagree, refuse to see the importance of details, it is your right. But it is our right to have our software working well for the rest of us, like we want. --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJTn6YTXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXRFMTA5OTk4ODQxOTdEN0NCQjBCQzVDMjM4 REVCMjRCQTg2N0QzRjdGAAoJEI3rJLqGfT9/prcP/1pVecq5lo43ki7MVy4iI6Za sY+/dJKKCANmG6pqrZTrnOrUsvLaKU6SegMfiVdp01FqBGO1++Kun0wrnW48n3wt +0/4Hb1LeY+27EY7TjprIdj8jETNEjdJmpW9S0JmrQrQo9wPan7V6ISIhuCRWqjV Pj06jzn0CHaSbvdFagXjUwmuVj07j6E0bTIZOVkA0HAAQRtqoxgzKw8/l5rvswx/ 5X6AWc/Glpy1eUz/LFa/GHmbSni61VHTs8p42M1VOg4XgKHZuH/shHwjD5ggsGDC 5m1PPcgUGDrVucvWYB2WQJztjoWouJzavNuO76ZBfIxZ6loex7sD9Vv2FI7z089X o7E0SXQb+xZjEkKtU5GmiAqnnwDljUnznEPa+2Zu/6QbOOvZZYAUOGguS8rYya7J gZXLBUqymf9S/Np2tHgs5tSrVWPVIan15bobsIzRZJQiqTtl93bWm8qT5twdLKH/ CAQ0we7ozoUcSS2blvn/NYY8uzp0rQeshNQm7RESJxzTfOUcGF7VkH06Zq39tv9S VmhygUn+PPs+yG3v7EWexxZILMzVxOfQIKJJANUCkBD0SRjEbpRCbBrh/EVd48xQ Luryi/htuasXqrzS5CNCSyg3K7eDDhec+ashrVNBCi6ln5KYgoC/xAiBHfwBghxt nVn7d8Ky5BG4Cg/OHAfI =zaLc -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--