[Top][All Lists]

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

Explicit encoding cookie in Elisp files, was: Re: bug#21568: [PATCH] Add

From: Dmitry Gutov
Subject: Explicit encoding cookie in Elisp files, was: Re: bug#21568: [PATCH] Add prettify-symbols-alist for js-mode
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 07:16:22 +0300
User-agent: 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).

reply via email to

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