Re: [PATCH] Unicode Lisp reader escapes

[Oliver Scholz]

Richard Stallman <address@hidden> writes:

>     > I think it would be better to put an explicit terminator into
>     > the construct.  Perhaps #.  So you would write "\u123#As I walked"
>
>     There is already the possibility to use `\ ' as a terminator.
>
> That is true.  The worry is that people might forget and run the
> unicode constant together with the following text.  People might not
> remember to use `\ ' when it is needed, if they usually don't need it.
>
> But it is no great disaster to make such an error--it will be obvious
> when you see the output.  So perhaps there's no need to do anything
> to avoid the problem.

At any rate the syntax for \u and \x should be entirely in parallel,
IMNSHO.

> One other question occurs to me.  In the Unicode branch,
> doesn't \x do this job?  If so, \u would be redundant once we
> merge in that code.  It would have no lasting purpose.

There would still be a conceptual difference. \x refers to the
internal representation of a character in Emacs, while \u refers to an
abstract character. In the Unicode branch the hex numbers would be the
same in both cases, but conceptually it is still different. Like
writing `?a' in Lisp code instead of just `97' or like using
`(null list)' instead of `(not list)'.


    Oliver
-- 
12 Floréal an 214 de la Révolution
Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité!