[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Your last change to browse-url is bogus.

From: YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu
Subject: Re: Your last change to browse-url is bogus.
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2007 21:54:05 +0900 (JST)

>>>>> On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 12:38:51 +0200, address@hidden (Michaël Cadilhac) 
>>>>> said:

>> These use mostly the same argument.  Can't we generalize this?
>> Would it hurt the callsites if they all would use "[*\"()',=;? ]"?

> Yes, it will.  A ``confusing char'' is just something Firefox or
> others can consider as a URL separator or as a variable or something
> when the website is passed as an argument to the executable, AFAIU.

> `?=*' for example are not usually ``confusing''.  The only place
> those chars are to be converted is when we browse for a file (thus
> when `?=' don't have their special meanings).

> In the other cases, removing those chars destroys the meaning of the
> URL.

%-escaping in browse-url-file-url (filename -> url) and those in other
places such as browse-url-netscape (url -> url) are inherently
different operations.
(see http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2006-05/msg01060.html)

I think consolidating these two operations into one function only
because they look similar is over-refactoring and shouldn't be done in
order to avoid re-escaping or re-unescaping by mistake.

                                     YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]