Subject: Re: "Binary" I/O and subprocesses on DOS_NT

From: Eli Zaretskii <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 13:15:07 +0300 (IDT)

On Thu, 28 Aug 1997, Geoff Voelker wrote:

> > And btw, why is the coding system for ASCII buffers (such as C source) 
> > set to undecided?  Shouldn't it be emacs-mule?
> 
> I don't think that we can assume that it is ASCII.

No, I'm talking about what decode_coding returns when the file is read
in.  It returns undecided if only ASCII characters are seen in the
buffer.

If that is because the user can add non-ASCII characters after that,
then the coding system for writing should be decided by looking at the
buffer contents when it is saved, but I don't see that this is
actually done.

---

From: Kenichi Handa <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 19:29:34 +0900

> buffer contents when it is saved, but I don't see that this is

When one inserts a new file in that buffer, and that new file is
encoded in, for instance, iso-latin-1, then buffer-file-coding-system
is changed to iso-latin-1.

But, if buffer-file-coding-system is emacs-mule before inserting that
new file, it doesn't change even after the insertion.

---
Ken'ichi HANDA
[email-masked]