On Wednesday 10 November 2004 00:03, Helmut Eller wrote:
I think we have two options:
use a fixed coding system between Emacs and Lisp. This coding system should be unibyte, since that is supported by all Lisps and covers most non-exotic uses. In this case we have to tell SBCL that it should use iso-latin-1 or similar instead of utf-8 for the socket stream to Emacs. Your lambda cannot be send to Emacs and the write operation should signal an error.
make the coding system configurable. One advantage is that you can send lambda to Emacs. The disadvantage is that we have to make the Emacs side multibyte clean, have to write about it in the manual, have the constant feeling that the coding systems don't match.
I strongly prefer option 1. What do you think?
Once the dust settles and I make the switch to the unicode capable SBCL - something I've been waiting for a long time - I'll have source code (html generation mostly) with embedded multi-lingual text, not to mention the obligatory lambda on the front page. It would be a great annoyance not being able to see a backtrace with funky characters.
As a user I very much prefer option 2.
Gabor