Re: decode-coding-string gone awry?

[David Kastrup]

Stefan Monnier <address@hidden> writes:

>> So that is basically the background why we can easily make the process
>> raw-text, but quite less easily make the buffer unibyte: AUCTeX will
>> use the same buffer for its next run, just erasing it, and if it has
>> turned unibyte, we get into trouble.
>
> OK.  raw-text is good.

Just to follow up on my last mail: the raw-text inserted
8bit-characters _are_ displayed with octal escape sequences, just like
I wished they were.  While I am pretty sure that I _have_ seen
something else as well, it would appear that I confused this with what
an AUCTeX run (probably with an intentionally wrong process encoding
of latin-1) produced, or some earlier iteration of the software.

Thanks for all the hand-holding.  All this is a bit crazy: first the
process "converting" to raw-text, then I taking this, "encoding"
raw-text, interpreting the escapes, and decoding to utf-8 or whatever
else...

But that's a secondary issue.  We can try making something more
sensible once we have the merger behind us.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum