Eli Zaretskii writes:
> > From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <address@hidden>
> > Cc: Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden>,
> > address@hidden
> > Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2008 12:23:37 +0900
> >
> > I also find it faintly unclean when the system has to go around
> > parsing symbol names to do things like change the EOL convention
> > preferred for a buffer.
>
> We don't parse the symbol name at all, AFAIR; instead, the properties
> of each symbol are defined in advance by define-coding-system.
OK, so you've got properties which must be defined in correspondence
with the coding system names. No parsing needed, but this would
bother me, defining NxMxP symbols when I could define N+M+P symbols.