[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le |
Date: |
Thu, 17 Apr 2008 01:09:36 +0300 |
> From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <address@hidden>
> Cc: address@hidden
> Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2008 05:15:42 +0900
>
> > I'm afraid that this will be very hard to implement in Emacs, since
> > the internals are very much exposed and we are used to copy strings to
> > and fro freely.
>
> > I think we also don't have sockets and other similar interfaces as
> > Lisp object to which we could give properties.
>
> That's a shame, isn't it?
Maybe, I really can't say.
- Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le, (continued)
- Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le, David Kastrup, 2008/04/15
- Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2008/04/16
- Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le, David Kastrup, 2008/04/16
- Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2008/04/16
- Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le, Eli Zaretskii, 2008/04/16
- Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2008/04/17
- Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le, Jan Djärv, 2008/04/17
- Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le, Eli Zaretskii, 2008/04/17
- Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2008/04/17
- Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le, Eli Zaretskii, 2008/04/17
- Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le, Stefan Monnier, 2008/04/16
- Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le, Stefan Monnier, 2008/04/14
- Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le, David Kastrup, 2008/04/14
- Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le, Stefan Monnier, 2008/04/14
- Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le, David Kastrup, 2008/04/14
- Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le, Stefan Monnier, 2008/04/14
- Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le, David Kastrup, 2008/04/15
- Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le, Stefan Monnier, 2008/04/15
- Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2008/04/14
Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le, Kenichi Handa, 2008/04/14