[code] Re: [textadept] Feature request: control characters / BOM

From: Joshua Krämer <joshua.kraemer.att.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 00:23:13 +0200

On 2014-08-07, 12:24, Mitchell wrote:

> On Wed, 6 Aug 2014, Joshua Krämer wrote:
> > Textadept prints control characters (like ESC or LF) in an
> > inverted-colour box; but only some control characters seem to be
> > respected. I miss for example the BOM (U+FEFF), ZWNJ (U+200C) and
> > ZWJ (U+200D).
> You should be able to do this via `buffer.representation`[1]. More
> info can be found here[2].

Thanks, but could you please give an example of the format to be
used for the buffer.representation value? This for example didn't
work (trying to implement the example at [2]):

control_string = {}
control_string["\xe2\x84\xa6"] = "U+2126 \xe2\x84\xa6"
buffer.representation = control_string

This also didn't work:

buffer.representation = {"\xe2\x84\xa6", "U+2126 \xe2\x84\xa6"}

> > Regarding BOM, it would be nice to have a menu item to insert it at
> > the beginning of the file. I would prefer the BOM to be shown as a
> > regular character at the beginning of the file, instead of
> > implementing BOM support as part of the file encoding, as done by
> > some editors.
> I'm no encoding expert so I'd prefer not to add that menu item or
> others that users might expect (UTF-16LE, UTF-16BE, UTF-32..., etc.)
> I think it's sufficient for you to add a menu item (e.g. to the Tools
> menu) that sets `io.encoding_bom`.

You mean buffer.encoding_bom? This is sufficient, yes.

> I've never seen an editor display a BOM in the editor view. Doing so
> would certainly confuse me. There's also the question of whether or
> not to make the BOM char read-only. I think it's easier to avoid all
> of this and simply treat the BOM behind the scenes.

The reason I asked about the BOM is that I struggled with a text file
that included a BOM and didn't work with a program that obviously has
no BOM support. Textadept didn't inform me about the BOM, so I didn't
know it was there and wondered what the problem could be. Thinking the
file must be corrupt somehow, I inspected it with xxd, and only then I
realized there was a BOM present (and this turned out to be the
problem). This is why I suggested to show the BOM in the editor view.
This way the user could easily see it and could easily remove it, too.
But I understand this may not be desirable for everybody. At least,
somehow the user should be informed about the presence of the BOM
(in the status bar, next to the encoding).

Kind regards,

You are subscribed to code.att.foicica.com.
To change subscription settings, send an e-mail to code+help.att.foicica.com.
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to code+unsubscribe.att.foicica.com.
Received on Thu 07 Aug 2014 - 18:23:13 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Fri 08 Aug 2014 - 06:54:35 EDT