RE: 'mule-fonts' hadling (Re: gtk mule-fonts note)
Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
>>>> "Ilya" == Ilya N Golubev
<gin(a)mo.msk.ru> writes:
Ilya> The known usage of the tag suggests that it may be used in
Ilya> added specifications regardless of types of devices
Ilya> currently initialized.
Fully agreed. The name `mule-fonts' also suggest that it has something
to do with Mule, and not with the type of the initialized devices (doing
so looks like a design bug to me).
Sorry, no. Because Emacs Lisp by default uses dynamic binding and
run-time definition of various things, it's up to the user to verify
the usage of any given object.
Hm, every package has to start with thousands of `fboundp's...? Surely
not. Packages assume that the supported Emacs flavors/versions support
a basic set of objects.
Evidently x-symbol thinks that the 'mule-fonts tag means
something
other than what it does (which is currently unclear).
The XEmacs Mule docs were very Spartanic some years ago, so I relied of
what I was told / read of how to add fonts to a given face on a XEmacs
with Mule support.
You can google them ("mule-fonts" xemacs) and find a lot, e.g.
http://list-archive.xemacs.org/xemacs-mule/199808/msg00002.html
http://tsukuba.m17n.org/mule-archive/2001-1/msg00009.html
http://lists.debian.org/debian-simplified-chinese/2000/debian-simplified-...
None of these mails says something that the `mule-fonts' tag has
something to do with the devices. BTW, Stephen, your name is mentioned
in these messages, too.
- Christoph