Re: raw-byte and char-table

[MON KEY]

> Number like #x3FFFA0 is so criptic.  The function name
> unibyte-char-to-multibyte is also not ideal, but I think
> it's better than #x3FFFA0.

Maybe I am misunderstanding, but I think the `#x' and `#o' syntax is
not cryptic at all in the context. These at least preserve identity:

 4194208, #o17777640, #x3fffa0

This signals an error:
 (unibyte-char-to-multibyte
  (unibyte-char-to-multibyte 160))

Also, there is the brevity factor:

(aref (syntax-table) #o17777640)

(aref (syntax-table) #x3fffa0)

(aref (syntax-table) 4194208)

(aref (syntax-table)
      (unibyte-char-to-multibyte 160))

> We could provide a ?\NNN (or similar) notation for it.  Similarly to
> what we do for those bytes in multibyte strings.

Howsabout just this one for all of them:

 `#\'

:)

>        Stefan

--
/s_P\