Re: Inconsistencies regarding nil coding-system

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Kenichi Handa <address@hidden>
> Cc: address@hidden
> Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2010 16:45:53 +0900
> 
> some old codes still treat nil for `no-conversion'

I see a few of such places in coding.c; are there others?

If coding.c is the only place, I think we can safely change it to
tread nil as unidecided.

> and new codes consider nil as "unspecified" and thus treat it as
> `undecided'.  Perhaps, ver. 24 is a good timing to wipe out this
> confusion, but I'm not sure how to treat nil.  Nil should usually
> mean "unspecified", and what exactly "unspecified" means depends on
> a situaion.

What would be a situation where it's inappropriate to interpret nil as
undecided?