[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: MULE shows gibberish; now what?

From: Ilya Zakharevich
Subject: Re: MULE shows gibberish; now what?
Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2002 20:17:31 +0000 (UTC)

[A complimentary Cc of this posting was sent to
<address@hidden>], who wrote in article <address@hidden>:
> > Well, this is not enough.  A font in gb2312 encoding *has* cyrillic
> > glyphs.  Will Emacs use them if they are present?
> At the moment, the functionality is lacking indeed.  There is a file
> latin1-disp.el which allows you to display some latin-2 characters
> using their latin-1 equivalents, and vice versa.  But I think this
> doesn't work with other fonts.
> Note that for Emacs, a Cyrillic character in GB2312 and a Cyrillic
> character in KOI-R (and so on) are all different characters, even
> though they might look the same.

Yes, I know about this incredible MULE design flaw.  Well, 10 years
ago the knowledge of internationalization issues was confined to giant
multinational corporations (like IBM); but 5 years ago, thanks to
emergence of Unicode, the understanding of the issues became much more
widespread.  It is a pity that RMS was so illiterate in this respect
that he accepted MULE into Emacs...

> I don't know how much of this will
> change in Emacs 22, but at the moment, that's the way it is.  And
> because Emacs considers them to be different characters, Emacs
> doesn't use glyphs for one character to display another.  And
> latin1-disp.el is the exception from that rule...

Note that your "because" is misplaced.  Even if buffer-filling engine
does not consider them the same, the display engine might have
remapped them for display purposes to the same codepoint in the same


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]