GNU bug report logs -
#3452
23.0.94; display
Previous Next
Reported by: rms <at> gnu.org
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2009 03:00:03 UTC
Severity: serious
Done: Chong Yidong <cyd <at> stupidchicken.com>
Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.
Full log
View this message in rfc822 format
In article <E1MDWmz-0001XD-Tm <at> fencepost.gnu.org>, Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:
> > On terminal, if a zero-width character doesn't follow a base
> > character, Emacs composes that character by prepending SPACE
> > hoping that the terminal treats that zero-width character as
> > zero-width too.
> So these characters should be currently displayed as SPACE?
Yes, that's my intention.
> Is it a good idea to rely on the terminal in this situation? Do we
> know for a fact that many (most?) terminals indeed behave like that
> with zero-width characters?
I'm not sure but I thought that it's reasonable to assume
that a character defined as zero-width by Unicode does not
occupy a screen column by itself.
Not for U+202D, but such combining characters as U+0300 are
treated correctly by xterm (not by gnome-terminal).
> > To conclude, I think there's not that much we can do for
> > this situation. I think the current behaviour of
> > gnome-terminal (displaying standalone U+202D as a space of
> > width 1) is a bug.
> If other terminals behave correctly, I would agree. But if not,
> perhaps we need to work around this, if possible. For example, we
> could have an entry in display tables for these characters.
It seems xterm, gnome-terminal, GNU/Linux console, and
mlterm treat U+202D as spacing character, but, Konsole
(KDE's terminal) and kterm treats it as non-spacing
character.
---
Kenichi Handa
handa <at> m17n.org
This bug report was last modified 15 years and 153 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.