Yoshiki Hayashi wrote:
Ben Wing <ben(a)666.com> writes:
> Martin Buchholz wrote:
> > I approve the patch, if this really works (it somewhat surprises me).
> > It did not work when I originally wrote this code. Does this also
> > work correctly for ttys? I mean, is the tty coding system properly
> > autodetected using determine_real_coding_system?
> > Blue Sky: Can
> > cat test.euc
> > cat test.jis
> > possibly work `correctly'?
Yes, because you can always distinguish that two
coding-system. When escape sequence `ESC [ $ B' is found,
it's most likely that coding-system is iso-2022-jp. When
two byte sequence has its MSB set, then it is probably
> > We know that the Latin equivalent
> > cat test.iso8859-2
> > cat test.iso8859-1
> > cannot.
Because there's no particular characteristics in that
coding-system. It's just 8bit byte sequences. So it
depends on what language-environment you are in. If you
only use those two, it may be possible to disguinsh them
with some good heuristics.
> Why not? Shell mode could reset things so as to force autodetection for the
> output of each command issued. Even your second example could work if those
> files had proper ISO2022 or X-Compound-Text or whatever escape sequences in
> them, or magic XEmacs coding-system: stuff, etc. to indicate the coding
> system. (Granted, not likely.)
Here's a list of candidate to Mule-izing shell-mode.
1. autodetect every time.
2. autodetect only first time.
3. set default coding-system and allow C-x RET c to alter
Now I found doing this
will set process-output-coding-system to raw-text, I don't
think 2 is a good plan (my original one).
I think 3 is best as most user use only one coding-system.
I'll send patch to do this.
Moved to xemacs-beta.
I disagree. We always want to be automatic when possible -- i.e. option 1. We
don't want to burden the user with extra work -- i.e. #3.
Besides that, it would be nice to have convenience way to
set coding-system of next command in shell-mode. Maybe
command to change process coding-system for permanently
would be nice, too.
In order to save my hands, I am cutting back on my responses, especially
to XEmacs-related mail. You _will_ get a response, but please be patient.
If you need an immediate response and it is not apparent in your message,
please say so. Thanks for your understanding.