[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: ChangeLog and unification
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
Re: ChangeLog and unification |
Date: |
Wed, 20 Feb 2002 08:25:45 +0200 (IST) |
On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> The unify-on-encode is safe and does not do unification.
What will it do if you yank a string with Latin-2 characters and then
save the buffer? Assuming that buffer-file-coding-system is
iso-2022-7bit, will it save those Latin-2 characters as Latin-2 or as
Latin-1? Also, what if I type characters with a latin-2 input method,
or with keyboard-coding-system set to latin-2--will the characters be
saved as Latin-2 or Latin-1?
> All it does is to allow saving latin-1 chars into a latin-2 file (as long
> as the latin-1 chars also exist in latin-2, of course).
In a file encoded with one of the iso8859-x encodings, this is indeed a
no-op. The plot might thicken when you use iso-2022-derived encodings,
which tag characters with their charset id. (I say ``might'' because I
really don't know what happens: I didn't yet have time to give
unify-on-* modes a serious test ride.)
> I really think unify-on-encode should be turned ON by default
> because I still haven't heard of any reasonable scenario where it can
> do anything undesirable.
You may be right, but the bitter experience with Mule-related issues
teaches me that we should be extra-cautious with turning features on by
default.
> Actually, I can't even think of any reason
> why we should try to make it possible to turn it off.
That is almost certainly a bad idea: it should be possible to turn off
_any_ feature, certainly a Mule-related one. Someone, some day, will
want that.