[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Explicit encoding cookie in Elisp files, was: Re: bug#21568: [PATCH] Add
Explicit encoding cookie in Elisp files, was: Re: bug#21568: [PATCH] Add prettify-symbols-alist for js-mode
Mon, 28 Sep 2015 07:16:22 +0300
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:41.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/41.0
On 09/28/2015 12:01 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
I see no ambiguity there. There are requirements, and there's "a good
idea" with an explanation that is left to the contributors to consider
and decide. I see nothing wrong with leaving the decision with them.
How about this wording?
but other files need them even if encoded in UTF-8. However, if an *.el
file is intended for use with older Emacs versions (e.g. if it's also
distributed via ELPA), having an explicit encoding specification is
still a good idea.
Then I'm sorry that my wording made such interpretation possible. It
was certainly not intended.
Thanks. It was exactly how I interpreted it.
Let's agree to disagree about that, okay?
I don't mind having a difference in opinion, if you don't object to
reverting db828f6. Having Elisp files default to UTF-8 is a good
feature, and you're proposing to effectively ignore it.
The form and the intense of the objections are out of proportions,
for such an insignificant issue/disagreement.
Sorry about the strong wording. Apparently, that's how I react to a
perceived feature/workflow regression made on purpose (not sure how to
phrase this better).
- Explicit encoding cookie in Elisp files, was: Re: bug#21568: [PATCH] Add prettify-symbols-alist for js-mode,
Dmitry Gutov <=