[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: address@hidden: FW: [21.1.90]: should coding be recalculated on reve
From: |
Andreas Schwab |
Subject: |
Re: address@hidden: FW: [21.1.90]: should coding be recalculated on revert-buffer?] |
Date: |
Tue, 26 Feb 2002 23:44:39 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.090005 (Oort Gnus v0.05) Emacs/21.2.50 (ia64-suse-linux) |
"Eli Zaretskii" <address@hidden> writes:
|> > Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 13:13:50 -0700 (MST)
|> > From: Richard Stallman <address@hidden>
|> >
|> > It might be okay to do that inside revert-buffer, but even then I'd
|> > suggest to do it only for the EOL format, not for the base of the
coding
|> > system, to keep the possible unintended consequences to a minimum.
|> >
|> > Why not do it for both aspects of the coding system, in revert?
|>
|> In principle, the two should go together, but in practice, the EOL
|> issue is much more simple and has less complications. So risky
|> decisions run lower risk with EOLs.
How about just setting buffer-file-coding-system to
last-coding-system-used in revert-buffer if coding-system-for-read is
non-nil? This way you can use `C-x RET c undecided' to force
re-detection.
2002-02-26 Andreas Schwab <address@hidden>
* files.el (revert-buffer): Set `buffer-file-coding-system' if an
explicit coding system was requested.
--- files.el.~1.550.~ Thu Feb 7 11:22:19 2002
+++ files.el Tue Feb 26 23:42:23 2002
@@ -3006,7 +3006,11 @@
do all the work for this command. Otherwise, the hooks
`before-revert-hook' and `after-revert-hook' are run at the beginning
and the end, and if `revert-buffer-insert-file-contents-function' is
-non-nil, it is called instead of rereading visited file contents."
+non-nil, it is called instead of rereading visited file contents.
+
+Sets `buffer-file-coding-system' to the atually used coding system if
+`coding-system-for-read' is non-nil, unless reverting from the auto-save
+file."
;; I admit it's odd to reverse the sense of the prefix argument, but
;; there is a lot of code out there which assumes that the first
@@ -3075,7 +3079,12 @@
coding-system-for-read)))
;; Note that this preserves point in an intelligent way.
(insert-file-contents file-name (not auto-save-p)
- nil nil t))))
+ nil nil t))
+ ;; When a coding system was explicitly requested set
+ ;; the file coding system to what was actually used.
+ (if (and coding-system-for-read (not auto-save-p))
+ (setq buffer-file-coding-system
+ last-coding-system-used))))
;; Recompute the truename in case changes in symlinks
;; have changed the truename.
(setq buffer-file-truename
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, address@hidden
SuSE GmbH, Deutschherrnstr. 15-19, D-90429 Nürnberg
Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."
Re: address@hidden: FW: [21.1.90]: should coding be recalculated on revert-buffer?], Miles Bader, 2002/02/25
- Re: address@hidden: FW: [21.1.90]: should coding be recalculated on revert-buffer?], Eli Zaretskii, 2002/02/25
- Re: address@hidden: FW: [21.1.90]: should coding be recalculated on revert-buffer?], Richard Stallman, 2002/02/26
- Re: address@hidden: FW: [21.1.90]: should coding be recalculated on revert-buffer?], Eli Zaretskii, 2002/02/26
- Re: address@hidden: FW: [21.1.90]: should coding be recalculated on revert-buffer?],
Andreas Schwab <=
- Re: address@hidden: FW: [21.1.90]: should coding be recalculated on revert-buffer?], Richard Stallman, 2002/02/27
- Re: address@hidden: FW: [21.1.90]: should coding be recalculated on revert-buffer?], Andreas Schwab, 2002/02/27
- Re: address@hidden: FW: [21.1.90]: should coding be recalculated on revert-buffer?], Richard Stallman, 2002/02/27
Re: address@hidden: FW: [21.1.90]: should coding be recalculated on revert-buffer?], Eli Zaretskii, 2002/02/27
Re: address@hidden: FW: [21.1.90]: should coding be recalculated on revert-buffer?], Kenichi Handa, 2002/02/25