Subject: bug#24902: Antw: [EXT] Re: bug#24902: 25.1; C‑x = for Unicode

From: Mattias Engdegård <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2022 13:38:05 +0100

27 jan. 2022 kl. 10.43 skrev Robert Pluim <[email-masked]>:

> Those are codepoints which have both a 'name' and an 'old-name'.
> 'C-u C-x =' will show both by default, I donʼt think itʼs necessary
> for 'C-x =', which will show 'name' if it exists, else 'old-name'.

Right, and it is probably the right call here -- only control characters have an old-name but no name (some have neither).
There is a single name/old-name collision, U+1F514 vs U+0007, but there's no serious risk of confusion.

> Iʼm more interested in the visual separation between the U+ABCD and
> the name.

Just a space seems to be the standard convention to the point that characters are nowadays often identified in that manner in prose, as in U+00A7 SECTION SIGN.
It also reinforces the connection between the code and the name, being separate from the rest of the information being displayed, which is about the cursor position. Is it good enough, you think?