[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Cyrillic vs UTF-8

From: Simon Josefsson
Subject: Re: Cyrillic vs UTF-8
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 00:29:59 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.09002 (Oort Gnus v0.20) XEmacs/21.4 (Portable Code, linux)

"Stefan Monnier" <monnier+gnu/address@hidden> writes:

>> Can't we move binary down below UTF-8 in CVS?  IMHO we should move
>> UTF-8 earlier still, since determining whether data is UTF-8 or not
>> can be done with good probability.  Prefering binary over UTF-8 seems
> Agreed, but I think one of the problems is that the preference-ordering
> is the same for load-time-detection as it is for save-time-detection,
> so if you move utf-8 up for detection you end up saving all new files
> in utf-8 which is not OK in non-utf-8 locales.

This sounds serious in theory, but I was unable to make emacs behave
unexpectedly in practice.  Do you have an example?

I tried opening a new file and typing åäö and saving it.  It was saved
(without query) as latin-1 with sv_SE, en_GB, en_US and C locales.
All are what I would expect, and is consistent with what I get for
emacs 21.3. (Of course, this is a western-centric test case, but I
don't know what non-western users expect so I can't really test
anything else.)

Note that iso-8-1 is still prefered over utf-8 with Kenichi's change.

Note also that mule-cmds.el seem to guess the appropriate charset for
most locales, so UTF-8 will never be prefered over the "locale
charset".  A jp_JP user will have a low priority for UTF-8.

reply via email to

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