From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [PATCH] Unicode Lisp reader escapes Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 19:32:27 +0300 Message-ID: References: <17491.34779.959316.484740@parhasard.net> <87odyfnqcj.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1146760394 20250 80.91.229.2 (4 May 2006 16:33:14 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 16:33:14 +0000 (UTC) Cc: kehoea@parhasard.net, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu May 04 18:33:12 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 1Fbgkq-0002TO-Jo for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 04 May 2006 18:32:40 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Fbgkq-0003Bk-2I for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 04 May 2006 12:32:40 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Fbgkc-0003AT-Op for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 04 May 2006 12:32:26 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Fbgkb-0003A2-4q for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 04 May 2006 12:32:26 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Fbgka-00039l-Sr for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 04 May 2006 12:32:24 -0400 Original-Received: from [192.114.186.66] (helo=romy.inter.net.il) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1FbglE-0004AK-DE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 04 May 2006 12:33:04 -0400 Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 (IGLD-80-230-13-145.inter.net.il [80.230.13.145]) by romy.inter.net.il (MOS 3.7.3-GA) with ESMTP id ECQ32167 (AUTH halo1); Thu, 4 May 2006 19:32:21 +0300 (IDT) Original-To: Kenichi Handa In-reply-to: (message from Kenichi Handa on Thu, 04 May 2006 10:33:55 +0900) 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:53918 Archived-At: > From: Kenichi Handa > Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 10:33:55 +0900 > Cc: kehoea@parhasard.net, eliz@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org > > > I think we should treat them as much as possible consistently with the rest > > of the treatment of unicode chars. If we start down the path of "OK, we can > > do it like this for those chars but not these, oh and as for those ones over > > there, we'll do it yet some other way", I think we're headed for headaches > > with no real benefit. > > I agree. What happens when a Lisp file is byte-compiled--do we want the result to depend on the local settings?