bug-gnu-emacs
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

bug#30405: 26.0.91; Incorrect apostrophe translation in ImageMagick erro


From: Paul Eggert
Subject: bug#30405: 26.0.91; Incorrect apostrophe translation in ImageMagick error message
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 09:43:34 -0800
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0

On 02/12/2018 09:03 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
In this scenario, you are not supposed to do that, you
are supposed to use only unibyte strings.

In that case the user should set the echo area to be unibyte, and if there's not a convenient way to do that then we should supply one. In the meantime Emacs is messed up, since it just guesses whether the echo area should be unibyte and (as we've seen) it guesses wrong in common cases.

Also, did you try the variant with 'error' instead of 'message' (in
which case you need to make*scratch*  unibyte before invoking 'foo'.

In that setup in the emacs-26 branch, (error "\xA2\u00A2") displays "¢¢" in the echo area and "\242¢" in *Backtrace* and "\300\242\302\242" in *Messages*, which is bogus. The 'message' variant displays "\242¢" in all three places; this is much better behavior.

Since the echo area's context is text and not binary data, the
display of raw bytes in the echo area should be unaffected by
unibyte-display-via-language-environment.
That variable's purpose is to display raw bytes as readable text, so I
definitely disagree in this specific use case.

The abovementioned test case establishes that the variable does not in fact always cause Emacs to display raw bytes as readable text. The only question is whether the documentation is wrong, or the code (or both :-). I've given a consistent interpretation that the intent of the variable is to display raw bytes as text when in a unibyte context (which the echo area is not). I haven't seen an alternative consistent interpretation that's corresponds to the behavior Emacs currently exhibits (i.e., the sort of behavior that elicited this bug report).






reply via email to

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