[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Inconsistencies regarding nil coding-system
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
Re: Inconsistencies regarding nil coding-system |
Date: |
Mon, 13 Dec 2010 16:58:05 +0200 |
> From: Kenichi Handa <address@hidden>
> Cc: address@hidden
> Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2010 16:45:53 +0900
>
> some old codes still treat nil for `no-conversion'
I see a few of such places in coding.c; are there others?
If coding.c is the only place, I think we can safely change it to
tread nil as unidecided.
> and new codes consider nil as "unspecified" and thus treat it as
> `undecided'. Perhaps, ver. 24 is a good timing to wipe out this
> confusion, but I'm not sure how to treat nil. Nil should usually
> mean "unspecified", and what exactly "unspecified" means depends on
> a situaion.
What would be a situation where it's inappropriate to interpret nil as
undecided?
- Inconsistencies regarding nil coding-system, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/12/11
- Inconsistencies regarding nil coding-system, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/12/11
- Re: Inconsistencies regarding nil coding-system, Kenichi Handa, 2010/12/13
- Re: Inconsistencies regarding nil coding-system,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- Re: Inconsistencies regarding nil coding-system, Kenichi Handa, 2010/12/13
- Re: Inconsistencies regarding nil coding-system, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/12/13
- Re: Inconsistencies regarding nil coding-system, Kenichi Handa, 2010/12/13
- Re: Inconsistencies regarding nil coding-system, Kenichi Handa, 2010/12/14
- Re: Inconsistencies regarding nil coding-system, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/12/14
- Re: Inconsistencies regarding nil coding-system, Kenichi Handa, 2010/12/14