GNU bug report logs - #39506
mm-shr unibyte assumption

Previous Next

Full log

Message #18 received at 39506 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: dick.r.chiang <at> gmail.com
To: Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
Cc: 39506 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#39506: patch
Date: Sat, 08 Feb 2020 14:01:44 -0500

> The focus of the sentence is on "before": the previous code already set the
> buffer to unibyte, but it did it afterwards.

Ah, so the buffer in question is merely the working temp-buffer, not the
handle-buffer.

Indeed, the previous code did it afterwards, and therein lies my salvation
because insert-buffer-substring of multibytes to a unibyte buffer corrupts.
I think the Miles Bader code replicated the multibyteness of the
handle-buffer to the temp-buffer, called insert-buffer-substring, and then
converted the temp-buffer to unibyte.

> - How does `mm-with-part` relate to `mm-shr`?

mm-shr calls mm-with-part.

> - Before deciding whether unibyte or multibyte is the right choice, the
>   main question is whether the buffer contains bytes or chars.

My buffer contained some Chinese multibytes.  You can see my unit test in the
patch.

>   AFAIK `mm-with-part` should only ever handle bytes (otherwise calling
>   `mm-decode-content-transfer-encoding` doesn't make much sense).

Okay, maybe mm-decode-content-transfer-encoding is a noop when it doesn't make
sense.

I'm not completely on top of all this, but my individual use case rather
prefers the old Miles Bader order of ops.  I can easily work around it if you feel
your 2008 change genuinely fixed something that was broken (my patch is largely
speculative and inconsiderate of broader ramifications).

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.