Re: Unicode update of width and other character properties

[Corinna Vinschen <vinschen@redhat.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2717 bytes --]

On Dec  3 15:07, Thomas Wolff wrote:
> > On Aug 17 07:53, Thomas Wolff wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > I have fixed locale handling in the isw* and tow* functions, but I've not
> > > yet changed JP conversion. Unfortunately, the routines from newlib/iconvdata
> > > are not as straight-forward to be employed as I thought, because the work on
> > > multi-byte representations.
> > > Also the mapping of ctype charsets (JIS, SJIS, EUC-JP) to the subsets
> > > handled in iconvdata (JIS-201/208/212) is a little bit obscure.
> > > Likewise obscure is the relation between newlib/iconvdata and
> > > newlib/libc/iconv.
> > This is really old stuff.  I wonder if anybody is still using it with
> > Unicode around for a long time...

I forgot to mention, I think your approach to keep this is the best
one for now so as not to break anything for small targets.

> > > To be on the safe side, I’m leaving the actual jp2uc conversion untouched
> > > for now, and I’ve just added a dummy back-conversion uc2jp with a #warning.
> > > If the #warning is ignored or removed, the non-Cygwin build should work as
> > > before, fixing just locale handling.
> > > 
> > > I'm attaching the wcwidth part here, all patches are available at
> > > http://towo.net/cygwin/Unicode_and_locale_tweaks.zip (don't fit in the
> > > mailbox size limit).
> > So why don't you use git send-email (ideally with a cover letter, see
> > `git format-patch --cover-letter') instead of attaching the patches to a
> > single email?  This is the correct way of sending patch series and it
> > gets you around the size limit.
> Because of:
> LC_ALL=C git send-email
> git: 'send-email' is not a git command. See 'git --help'.
> 
> Are there any working instructions for newlib contributions to be found
> anywhere?

Jon and Brian answered that.

> > The below patches are missing a patch, last one is patch 3/4.
> > 
> > Patches 2 and 3 are ok, afaics, but as for patch 1, why did you create
> > an extra Makefile?  This should be merged into string/Makefile.am.
> I was awaiting feedback before doing further integration work. The Makefile
> includes test stuff and also the table generation. Would the generation be
> invoked every time or rather called manually?

Keeping generated files in the repos is frowned upon these days, but
we're doing this for a pretty long time already and don't want everybody
having to do these, mostly awkward steps.  So, yeah, keeping the tables
in the repo and manually calling the generation targets sounds right to
me.  Only maintainers (or interested parties) need to do this once in a
while.


Thanks,
Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen
Cygwin Maintainer
Red Hat

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]