From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1059 invoked by alias); 29 Apr 2017 06:39:39 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes List-Id: Zsh Workers List List-Post: List-Help: X-Seq: 41031 Received: (qmail 21970 invoked from network); 29 Apr 2017 06:39:39 -0000 X-Qmail-Scanner-Diagnostics: from aok120.rev.netart.pl by f.primenet.com.au (envelope-from , uid 7791) with qmail-scanner-2.11 (clamdscan: 0.99.2/21882. spamassassin: 3.4.1. Clear:RC:0(85.128.245.120):SA:0(0.0/5.0):. Processed in 2.471174 secs); 29 Apr 2017 06:39:39 -0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on f.primenet.com.au X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 X-Envelope-From: psprint@zdharma.org X-Qmail-Scanner-Mime-Attachments: | X-Qmail-Scanner-Zip-Files: | Received-SPF: none (ns1.primenet.com.au: domain at zdharma.org does not designate permitted sender hosts) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new using ClamAV (16) Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2017 08:39:26 +0200 From: Sebastian Gniazdowski To: zsh-workers@zsh.org, Peter Stephenson Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20170428154135.2e2b5626@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri> References: <20170428124439.73447db2@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri> <20170428141650.7ed174d6@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri> <20170428154135.2e2b5626@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri> Subject: Re: Cannot paste unicode <0221>, <0234> - <024f> X-Mailer: Airmail (231) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On 28 kwietnia 2017 at 16:42:17, Peter Stephenson (p.stephenson=40samsung= .com) wrote: > It might be possible to rely *only* on wcwidth() in cases where we're > using a replacement=3F Does anyone from the Apple world have any > opinions=3F This is a situation where having compile-time tests and equipped redundan= t survival-thing should yield a edge case where problem can be managed an= d solved despite hard conditions. There is always a difficult for eyes qu= estion: Why not always rely on internal wcwidth=3F Sorry for this questio= n, I'm pro clever redundancy. A fact: it is easy to detect <0234>-alike problem =E2=80=93 test 0234 cha= racter in wcwidth configure check, define BROKEN=5FWCWIDTH. Ideal followi= ng solution: add iswprint test of 0234 to configure, use BROKEN=5FISWPRIN= T. It should be easy. Broken wcwidth might imply broken iswprint, so you might be right about s= imple approach =E2=80=93 to rely only on internal wcwidth when BROKEN=5FW= CWIDTH, i.e. skip iswprint. Are there some opinions on this=3F --=C2=A0 Sebastian Gniazdowski psprint /at/ zdharma.org