[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#58168: string-lessp glitches and inconsistencies
From: |
Mattias Engdegård |
Subject: |
bug#58168: string-lessp glitches and inconsistencies |
Date: |
Tue, 4 Oct 2022 16:44:17 +0200 |
4 okt. 2022 kl. 13.37 skrev Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>:
> First I needed to fix fallout from making STRING_CHAR intolerant of
> unibyte text, because redisplay-testsuite caused assertion violations
> in string_char_and_length.
Good catch! Just to satisfy my curiosity:
> error ("Invalid format operation %%%c",
> - STRING_CHAR ((unsigned char *) format - 1));
> + multibyte_format
> + ? STRING_CHAR ((unsigned char *) format - 1)
> + : *((unsigned char *) format - 1));
This treats unibyte format strings as if they were Latin-1 for the purpose of
the error message. Not very important, of course, but maybe there should be a
UNIBYTE_TO_CHAR in the alternative branch?
> (Doesn't it abort for you? or do you not
> build Emacs with --enable-checking?)
Oh I certainly do that occasionally, but it's mostly when I've changed
something at the C level or have reason to believe that something is broken
there.
> I could understand why you'd want to _add_ the larger values, but why
> replace?
Because it seemed pretty clear that the old code intended to use #x3ffffc for
testing display of raw bytes but a typo turned it into #x3fffc instead which
isn't a raw byte but a multibyte character. That it's an easy mistake to make
(done so several times myself).
Thus the change fixes that: it now correctly tests #x3ffffc (multibyte raw byte
FC) as well as a couple of undisplayable multibyte chars (one C1 control and
one astral plane unicode value made undisplayable). Now everything should be
described correctly, which wasn't the case before.
> As for the bug report which led to display-raw-bytes-as-hex (if that
> what you meant) and its discussion, it's bug#27122.
Thank you, but I actually meant the one where it was agreed that it was a good
idea to display raw bytes and Latin-1 U+0080..009F in the same way. There isn't
much of a code trail because it probably never was a conscious decision -- it
just ended up being that way -- but apparently the status quo was
defended/rationalised at some point.
I've now pushed the patch; the code can be improved further if necessary.
- bug#58168: string-lessp glitches and inconsistencies, (continued)
- bug#58168: string-lessp glitches and inconsistencies, Eli Zaretskii, 2022/10/01
- bug#58168: string-lessp glitches and inconsistencies, Eli Zaretskii, 2022/10/01
- bug#58168: string-lessp glitches and inconsistencies, Lars Ingebrigtsen, 2022/10/01
- bug#58168: string-lessp glitches and inconsistencies, Eli Zaretskii, 2022/10/01
- bug#58168: string-lessp glitches and inconsistencies, Mattias Engdegård, 2022/10/01
- bug#58168: string-lessp glitches and inconsistencies, Lars Ingebrigtsen, 2022/10/01
- bug#58168: string-lessp glitches and inconsistencies, Mattias Engdegård, 2022/10/03
- bug#58168: string-lessp glitches and inconsistencies, Lars Ingebrigtsen, 2022/10/04
- bug#58168: string-lessp glitches and inconsistencies, Eli Zaretskii, 2022/10/04
- bug#58168: string-lessp glitches and inconsistencies,
Mattias Engdegård <=
- bug#58168: string-lessp glitches and inconsistencies, Eli Zaretskii, 2022/10/04
- bug#58168: string-lessp glitches and inconsistencies, Mattias Engdegård, 2022/10/06
- bug#58168: string-lessp glitches and inconsistencies, Eli Zaretskii, 2022/10/06
- bug#58168: string-lessp glitches and inconsistencies, Mattias Engdegård, 2022/10/06
- bug#58168: string-lessp glitches and inconsistencies, Eli Zaretskii, 2022/10/06
- bug#58168: string-lessp glitches and inconsistencies, Mattias Engdegård, 2022/10/07
- bug#58168: string-lessp glitches and inconsistencies, Eli Zaretskii, 2022/10/07
- bug#58168: string-lessp glitches and inconsistencies, Mattias Engdegård, 2022/10/08
- bug#58168: string-lessp glitches and inconsistencies, Eli Zaretskii, 2022/10/01