[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Usage of standard-display-table in MSDOS
From: |
Kenichi Handa |
Subject: |
Re: Usage of standard-display-table in MSDOS |
Date: |
Mon, 30 Aug 2010 11:24:13 +0900 |
In article <address@hidden>, Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:
> > From: Kenichi Handa <address@hidden> > Cc:
> address@hidden > Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2010 13:18:02
> +0900
> >
> > In article <address@hidden>, Eli Zaretskii
> <address@hidden> writes:
> >
> > > > > "Display characters in the range L to H
> literally."
> > > >
> > > > > The "literally" part is no longer true, is it?
> > > >
> > > > What's the meaning of "literally" when a display
> table > > > element is [#xA0]?
> >
> > > It means that a literal byte 0xA0 is sent to the
> terminal.
> >
> > From which document, can we get that interpretation?
> That's my understanding of the word "literally".
But, how do you apply that understanding to this element:
[#x100]
> Plus,
> standard-display-8bit worked like that in previous
> versions of Emacs. If we mean for it to do something
> else, we should amend the docstring.
The current behaviour of standard-display-8bit is the
natural consequence of the fact that we changed character
codes. But, perhaps we should explain what "literally"
really means.
> > (aset standard-display-table (unibyte-char-to-multibyte
> #xA0) > (vector (unibyte-char-to-multibyte #xA0)))
> Shouldn't standard-display-8bit be modified to use this, instead of
> what it does now? It seems like it was previously used to work around
> the terminal encoding, but that fire escape was plumbed in Emacs 23.
> Perhaps we should reinstate that feature?
Yes. That's why I wrote:
handa> Should we change the above code and all other codes setting
handa> 0x80th..0xA0th elements of a display table?
eliz> Yes. IMO, we should consistently use the codepoints of eight-bit
eliz> characters in all char-tables.
handa>Ok, if Yidong and Stefan agree too, I'll work on it.
I have not yet got any response but have started the work.
> And there's still the question of what to do with the
> fragment in standard-display-european-internal that uses
> standard-display-8bit. Should it be removed, or should it
> be rewritten in some way?
The docstring of standard-display-european says it's
semi-obsolete. But, as far as we provide that function, we
should modify the current code to do what expected.
---
Kenichi Handa
address@hidden
- Re: Usage of standard-display-table in MSDOS, (continued)
- Re: Usage of standard-display-table in MSDOS, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/08/25
- Re: Usage of standard-display-table in MSDOS, Ehud Karni, 2010/08/26
- Re: Usage of standard-display-table in MSDOS, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/08/26
- Re: Usage of standard-display-table in MSDOS, Ehud Karni, 2010/08/27
- Re: Usage of standard-display-table in MSDOS, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/08/27
Re: Usage of standard-display-table in MSDOS, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/08/27
- Re: Usage of standard-display-table in MSDOS, Kenichi Handa, 2010/08/27
- Re: Usage of standard-display-table in MSDOS, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/08/27
- Re: Usage of standard-display-table in MSDOS, Kenichi Handa, 2010/08/28
- Re: Usage of standard-display-table in MSDOS, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/08/28
- Re: Usage of standard-display-table in MSDOS,
Kenichi Handa <=
- Re: Usage of standard-display-table in MSDOS, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/08/29
- Re: Usage of standard-display-table in MSDOS, Kenichi Handa, 2010/08/31
Re: Usage of standard-display-table in MSDOS, Ehud Karni, 2010/08/29
Re: Usage of standard-display-table in MSDOS, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/08/29
Re: Usage of standard-display-table in MSDOS, Ehud Karni, 2010/08/29
Re: Usage of standard-display-table in MSDOS, Ehud Karni, 2010/08/29
Re: Usage of standard-display-table in MSDOS, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/08/29
Re: Usage of standard-display-table in MSDOS, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/08/29