Re: "no-conversion" coding system

[Stefan Monnier]

>> I mean, this is a misnomer which gives the illusion that there is such
>> a thing as "no conversion", even though in reality there always is some
>> conversion going on.

>> `no-conversion' used to really mean no conversion.
>> Why has that changed?

Technically, that may be true.  But take a utf-8 text and open it with
"no-conversion" and it won't look like the same text, so for some
interpretation of "conversion", it has been converted.
I.e. it's a name that leads to confusion.  Its other name "binary" is
a lot more unequivocal.


        Stefan