On Fri, Jun 01, 2018 at 11:02:57AM +0200, Stefan Sperling wrote: > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 04:01:57PM -0400, S. Gilles wrote: > > On 2018-05-30T09:17:22-0600, Theo de Raadt wrote: > > > This approach seems misguided. Let me tell a story. > > > > > > More than two decades ago, I made a fork of mg which was 100% byte > > > clean. Unfortunately I lost the source code of that change. mg's data > > > buffers are a linked list of lines, with a \n implied by the end of each > > > string. 0 bytes are unsupported. Supporting multibyte risks a string > > > merger getting confused by these problems and creating junk. My fork > > > changed mg to embed \n and \0 in the strings, and have the display code > > > understand that. All buffer-search functionalities also learned of this > > > change. The change had to be made quite incrementally and carefully, > > > but I recall the end result deleted far more code than it added. mg > > > became > > > 100% 8-bit clean, I could edit binaries with it. > > > > > > I think trying to shoehorn utf8 in before mg is 8-bit clean is a recipe > > > for disaster. There are too many functions (imagine search-replace) > > > which already have nasty special cases for \n, and now will need nasty > > > special cases for utf8 and I don't think this will work out nice. > > > > Fair enough. I am decidely not up for reworking all of mg. It seems > > better that this patch, as it is, remain off to the side in case > > someone wants to use it themselves. > > The feedback you got to your patch may seem like a setback. > But framing it as people asking you to "rework all of mg" by yourself > doesn't really align with what's happening here. > > What is really being asked for is work which improves the overall quality > of this editor and makes UTF-8 support easier to add in the long term. > Ideally, this isn't done by just one person, There needs to be a review > process and pooling of expertise held in the minds of various people. > > I'll note that someone else (Leonid), and not you, posted this patch of > yours to this list and thereby started a review process which you might > not even want to be part of. And that's fine, you don't need to be here. > I don't know if you were even asked before your patch was posted. >
I asked: https://github.com/hboetes/mg/pull/2#issue-190977781 > Generally we expect people who post patches to also take care of any > feedback they get for those patches themselves. But Lenoid just funnelled > our feedback back to you, which isn't how this is supposed to work. > I am happy to be a tester, this is the best what I can do right now. I didn't study mg's code, nor did I check the diffs and ask why there are so many weird things in code. I do run time testing and report run time bugs. I started this thread because I'm sure I'm not the only one who needs UTF-8 support and doesn't want to run GNU Emacs. > Nobody expects anyone to get anything done within any particular > amount of time. If there is no fun in it for you anymore, just stop. > Somebody who cares (or several people who care) enough about mg might > eventually put in the work to make happen what the community wants. >
