Re: set-process-filter-multibyte and etc.

[Kenichi Handa]

In article <address@hidden>, address@hidden (Kim F. Storm) writes:

> Kenichi Handa <address@hidden> writes:
>>  In article <address@hidden>, address@hidden (Kim F. Storm) writes:
>>  >>  The only question is when to check
>>  >>  default-enable-multibyte-characters.  When a process is
>>  >>  created, or just before calling a filter?  I think the
>>  >>  former is more like file I/O.  And it may be ok to have a
>>  >>  function set-process-filter-multibyte which can change the
>>  >>  multibyteness of a string to a filter on the way.
>>  
>>  > Good points.  Also, there could be a new `:multibyte BOOL' argument to
>>  > make-network-process to initialize the filter multibyteness of the new
>>  > process; specifying this would override the setting of
>>  > default-enable-multibyte-characters.
>>  
>>  >>  Or, was the intention of set-process-multibyte actually
>>  >>  set-process-filter-multibyte?
>>  
>>  > At least, that was the problem I was looking at when I suggested it,
>>  > so yes.
>>  
>>  I've just installed changes for set-process-filter-multibyte
>>  and etc.

> Great.  I've fixed a few typos and doc strings.

Thank you.

> If a process buffer is specified to start-process or make-network-process,
> it would seem logical to assume that the process filter will
> eventually insert the string into that buffer.  

> So I wonder whether it would make sense to let the default filter
> multibyteness depend on the multibyteness of the BUFFER argument to
> start-process and make-network-process (if specified and non-nil)?

> And only revert to default-enable-multibyte-characters if BUFFER is nil.

That sounds reasonable.   If there's no objection, I'll
change the code.

---
Ken'ichi HANDA
address@hidden