Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Multibyte bugs (Update)

Expand Messages
  • Tony Mechelynck
    ... Update: There is a second case which triggers incorrect behaviour in when encoding is UTF-8: - As noted above, after every 0x80 byte in
    Message 1 of 8 , Apr 7, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      On 03/04/10 06:36, Tony Mechelynck wrote:
      > Hi Bram,
      >
      > 1. (Minor bug): On this system (gvim 7.2.411, Huge version with
      > GTK2-GNOME GUI), typing Ctrl-K in Insert mode followed by two spaces
      > doesn't give the expected result: instead of U+00A0 ("Alt-space", the
      > non-breaking space) I get U+E000, a CJK character. Ctrl-K NS works
      > correctly.
      >
      > 2. U+E000 is displayed in gvim as CJK halfwidth. Shouldn't it be fullwidth?
      >
      > 3. "\<Char-nnnn>" gives wrong results for some Unicode codepoints. I
      > tried to find examples and counterexamples, as follows (in the comment
      > after the :echo statements, the UTF-8 expansion in hex):
      >
      > :echo "«\<Char-0x40>" | " 40
      > «@»
      > :echo "«\<Char-0x80>" | " C2 80
      > «<80><fe>X»
      > :echo "«\<Char-0x100>»" | " C4 80
      > «Ā<fe>X»
      > :echo "«\<Char-0x101>»" | " C4 81
      > «ā»
      > :echo "«\<Char-0x180>»" | " C6 80
      > «ƀ<fe>X»
      > :echo "«\<Char-0x190>»" | " C6 90
      > «Ɛ»
      > :echo "«\<Char-0x1A0>»" | " C6 A0
      > «Ơ»
      > :echo "«\<Char-0x1C0>»" | " C7 80
      > «ǀ<fe>X»
      > :echo "«\<Char-0x4E00>»" | " E4 B8 80
      > «一<fe>X»
      > :echo "«\<Char-0x4E01>»" | " E4 B8 81
      > «丁»
      > :echo "«\<Char-0x4E20>»" | " E4 B8 A0
      > «丠»
      > :echo "«\<Char-0x4E40>»" | " E4 B9 80
      > «乀<fe>X»
      > :echo "«\<Char-0xE000>»" | " EE 80 80
      > «<ee><80><fe>X<80><fe>X»
      > :echo "«\<Char-57344>»" | " EE 80 80
      > «<ee><80><fe>X<80><fe>X»
      > :echo "«\<Char-0xE001>»" | " EE 80 81
      > «<ee><80><fe>X<81>»"
      > :echo "«\<Char-0xE040>»" | " EE 81 80
      > «<fe>X»
      >
      > This seems to indicate that the extra bytes 0xFE 0x58 appear after any
      > 0x80 in the UTF-8 expansion of the character. (I added the « »
      > characters to "bound" the display so that any extra whitespace would be
      > visible but they change nothing to the bug.)
      >
      > The bug does not occur after Ctrl-V u in Insert mode or when using
      > <Char-...> in an Insert-mode mapping. It does when using "\<Char-...>"
      > in other commands than :echo. Note the following:
      >
      > :let j = "\<Char-0xE000>"
      > :let j
      > j <ee><80><fe>X<80><fe>X
      > i<Ctrl-R>=j<Enter>
      > î<t_þ>X<t_þ>X
      >
      > (where <Ctrl-R> and <Enter> are one keystroke each, not counting
      > modifiers). Apparently gvim tries to interpret 0x80 0xFE as a "special
      > key", and "resolves" it (incorrectly) as <t_þ>.
      >
      > Two very big files were loaded when I first noticed bug #3, but
      > restarting gvim without them reproduced the bug again with the same
      > spurious bytes.
      >
      >
      > Best regards,
      > Tony.

      Update: There is a second case which triggers incorrect behaviour in
      "\<Char-nnnn>" when 'encoding' is UTF-8:

      - As noted above, after every 0x80 byte in the UTF-8 representation, the
      bytes 0xFE 0x58 are spuriously added: after the UTF-8 string if the 0x80
      is its last byte (giving two invalid bytes after the correct multibyte
      glyph), and/or in the middle of it if there is a 0x80 byte other than
      the last (making the whole multibyte sequence invalid; the 0x80 can
      never be the first byte, because the first byte of a multibyte UTF-8
      sequence is >= 0xC0 [0xC2 actually, except for "overlong" sequences
      representing ASCII bytes], and it can not be an "only byte" because
      single-byte sequences are <= 0x7F).

      - In addition, after every 0x9B byte, the bytes 0xFD 0x4F are added,
      also immediately after that byte, breaking the UTF-8 sequence if it
      isn't the last byte.

      - The above are repeatable "every time", even from one run of gvim to
      the next, and I always get 0x80 0xFE 0x58 instead of 0x80, and 0x9B 0xFD
      0x4F instead of 0x9B, in all the UTF-8 sequences generated by the
      "\<Char-nnnn>" construct.

      - Removing the spurious bytes (including those in the middle of a byte
      sequence) make the correct multibyte glyph appear immediately (I'm
      assuming, of course, that 'encoding' is still set to UTF-8).

      - The fact that those two byte values, 0x80 aka Alt-Null and 0x9B aka
      Alt-Escape aka CSI, play special roles in gvim's representation of
      special keys, might help to spot where the bug comes from. (Yes, did I
      say it? I tested all this in GUI mode, in my usual "Huge" gvim with
      GTK2/Gnome GUI, and, of course, with +multi_byte among others. Currently
      at patchlevel 7.2.411)


      I'm crossposting this update to vim_dev because my first post (in
      vim_multibyte) got no reply whatsoever; but it was only four days ago,
      and the Easter holiday is upon us; maybe I wasn't patient enough.


      Have a nice holiday, and Happy Vimming!
      Tony.
      --
      Immortality -- a fate worse than death.
      -- Edgar A. Shoaff

      --
      You received this message from the "vim_multibyte" maillist.
      For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php

      To unsubscribe, reply using "remove me" as the subject.
    • Bram Moolenaar
      ... Why do you expect CTRL-K to produce 0xa0? According to http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1345.html it s 0xe000. ... Why would it be a
      Message 2 of 8 , Apr 10, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        Tony Mechelynck wrote:

        > 1. (Minor bug): On this system (gvim 7.2.411, Huge version with
        > GTK2-GNOME GUI), typing Ctrl-K in Insert mode followed by two spaces
        > doesn't give the expected result: instead of U+00A0 ("Alt-space", the
        > non-breaking space) I get U+E000, a CJK character. Ctrl-K NS works
        > correctly.

        Why do you expect CTRL-K <space> <space> to produce 0xa0? According to
        http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1345.html it's 0xe000.

        > 2. U+E000 is displayed in gvim as CJK halfwidth. Shouldn't it be fullwidth?

        Why would it be a double-width character? In
        http://unicode.org/Public/UNIDATA/EastAsianWidth.txt it's marked as
        "private use".

        > 3. "\<Char-nnnn>" gives wrong results for some Unicode codepoints. I
        > tried to find examples and counterexamples, as follows (in the comment
        > after the :echo statements, the UTF-8 expansion in hex):
        >
        > :echo "«\<Char-0x40>" | " 40
        > «@»
        > :echo "«\<Char-0x80>" | " C2 80
        > «<80><fe>X»
        > :echo "«\<Char-0x100>»" | " C4 80
        > «Ā<fe>X»
        > :echo "«\<Char-0x101>»" | " C4 81
        > Â«Ä Â»
        > :echo "«\<Char-0x180>»" | " C6 80
        > «ƀ<fe>X»
        > :echo "«\<Char-0x190>»" | " C6 90
        > Â«Æ Â»
        > :echo "«\<Char-0x1A0>»" | " C6 A0
        > Â«Æ Â»
        > :echo "«\<Char-0x1C0>»" | " C7 80
        > «ǀ<fe>X»
        > :echo "«\<Char-0x4E00>»" | " E4 B8 80
        > «一<fe>X»
        > :echo "«\<Char-0x4E01>»" | " E4 B8 81
        > Â«ä¸ Â»
        > :echo "«\<Char-0x4E20>»" | " E4 B8 A0
        > Â«ä¸ Â»
        > :echo "«\<Char-0x4E40>»" | " E4 B9 80
        > «乀<fe>X»
        > :echo "«\<Char-0xE000>»" | " EE 80 80
        > «<ee><80><fe>X<80><fe>X»
        > :echo "«\<Char-57344>»" | " EE 80 80
        > «<ee><80><fe>X<80><fe>X»
        > :echo "«\<Char-0xE001>»" | " EE 80 81
        > «<ee><80><fe>X<81>»"
        > :echo "«\<Char-0xE040>»" | " EE 81 80
        > Â«î €<fe>X»
        >
        > This seems to indicate that the extra bytes 0xFE 0x58 appear after any
        > 0x80 in the UTF-8 expansion of the character. (I added the « »
        > characters to "bound" the display so that any extra whitespace would be
        > visible but they change nothing to the bug.)

        The form "\<xxx>" is for special keys, not characters. For the character
        itself use \x or \u or \U. See ":help expr-string".
        The special keys are escaped for use in a mapping.

        > The bug does not occur after Ctrl-V u in Insert mode or when using
        > <Char-...> in an Insert-mode mapping. It does when using "\<Char-...>"
        > in other commands than :echo. Note the following:
        >
        > :let j = "\<Char-0xE000>"
        > :let j
        > j <ee><80><fe>X<80><fe>X
        > i<Ctrl-R>=j<Enter>
        > î<t_þ>X<t_þ>X
        >
        > (where <Ctrl-R> and <Enter> are one keystroke each, not counting
        > modifiers). Apparently gvim tries to interpret 0x80 0xFE as a "special
        > key", and "resolves" it (incorrectly) as <t_þ>.
        >
        > Two very big files were loaded when I first noticed bug #3, but
        > restarting gvim without them reproduced the bug again with the same
        > spurious bytes.

        --
        SUPERIMPOSE "England AD 787". After a few more seconds we hear hoofbeats in
        the distance. They come slowly closer. Then out of the mist comes KING
        ARTHUR followed by a SERVANT who is banging two half coconuts together.
        "Monty Python and the Holy Grail" PYTHON (MONTY) PICTURES LTD

        /// Bram Moolenaar -- Bram@... -- http://www.Moolenaar.net \\\
        /// sponsor Vim, vote for features -- http://www.Vim.org/sponsor/ \\\
        \\\ download, build and distribute -- http://www.A-A-P.org ///
        \\\ help me help AIDS victims -- http://ICCF-Holland.org ///

        --
        You received this message from the "vim_multibyte" maillist.
        For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php

        To unsubscribe, reply using "remove me" as the subject.
      • Tony Mechelynck
        ... When {char} is 0x20 i.e. , the above tells me that CTRL-K gives 0xA0 i.e. the non-breaking space, which is useful to enter the
        Message 3 of 8 , Apr 10, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
          On 10/04/10 23:43, Bram Moolenaar wrote:
          >
          > Tony Mechelynck wrote:
          >
          >> 1. (Minor bug): On this system (gvim 7.2.411, Huge version with
          >> GTK2-GNOME GUI), typing Ctrl-K in Insert mode followed by two spaces
          >> doesn't give the expected result: instead of U+00A0 ("Alt-space", the
          >> non-breaking space) I get U+E000, a CJK character. Ctrl-K NS works
          >> correctly.
          >
          > Why do you expect CTRL-K<space> <space> to produce 0xa0? According to
          > http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1345.html it's 0xe000.

          Because of the following paragraph at lines 99-100 of digraph.txt:

          ----8<----
          > For CTRL-K, there is one general digraph: CTRL-K <Space> {char} will enter
          > {char} with the highest bit set. You can use this to enter meta-characters.
          ---->8----

          When {char} is 0x20 i.e. <Space>, the above tells me that CTRL-K <Space>
          <Space> gives 0xA0 i.e. the non-breaking space, which is useful to enter
          the "meta-character" Meta-Space if I don't remember the NS digraph. If
          U+E000 is a "private use" character, I don't see why it needs a digraph
          of its own anyway.

          On reading that RFC, which states in its beginning paragraph that it has
          no normative value whatsoever, I see (at the very end of section 3)
          quite a number of digraphs and trigraphs assigned to U+E000 to U+E028,
          in what Unicode calls a "private use area": see for instance the very
          start of http://www.unicode.org/charts/pdf/UE000.pdf:

          ----8<----
          Private Use Area
          Range: E000–F8FF
          The Private Use Area does not contain any character assignments,
          consequently no character code charts or namelists are provided for this
          area.
          ---->8----

          At least some of the characters listed there in the RFC have a different
          Unicode codepoint assigned to them, but maybe Unicode assigned them
          after the RFC (dated June 1992) was published. Personally I have strong
          doubts as to the usefulness of any Vim digraph for a "private use"
          character. U+E000 is listed as "indicates unfinished (Mnemonic)". I'm
          not sure what that means, unless maybe that a blank space in a charset
          chart (further down in the same RFC) indicates that the chart is unfinished?

          >
          >> 2. U+E000 is displayed in gvim as CJK halfwidth. Shouldn't it be fullwidth?
          >
          > Why would it be a double-width character? In
          > http://unicode.org/Public/UNIDATA/EastAsianWidth.txt it's marked as
          > "private use".

          Ah, I see. FWIW my usual 'guifont' has a glyph for it, which AFAICT is a
          fullwidth CJK glyph. OTOH the Unihan database does not mention it.

          >
          >> 3. "\<Char-nnnn>" gives wrong results for some Unicode codepoints.
          [...]
          >
          > The form "\<xxx>" is for special keys, not characters. For the character
          > itself use \x or \u or \U. See ":help expr-string".
          > The special keys are escaped for use in a mapping.

          The example given at |expr-string| is "\<C-W>" which is the "<control>"
          character defined by ASCII as 0x17 ("\x17") and by Unicode as U+0017
          ("\u0017"), not a "special" non-ASCII key like <F8>, <Home> or
          <PageDown>. I had always thought that _every_ <> name could be used in a
          double-quoted string with a backslash prefix, and indeed I have verified
          that it works for all the <Char-nnnn> or <Char-0xnnnn> that I tested
          _except_ those whose UTF-8 expansion includes either or both of the
          bytes 0x80 and 0x9B, in which case two spurious bytes are inserted
          immediately after every occurrence of a 0x80 or 0x9B byte.

          If this bug is WONTFIX, I suggest to mention explicitly at the bottom of
          the list under |expr-quote| that the \<xxx> form does not apply if xxx
          is Char-nnnn or Char-0xnnnn.


          Best regards,
          Tony.
          --
          "To whoever finds this note -
          I have been imprisoned by my father who wishes me to marry
          against my will. Please please please please come and rescue me.
          I am in the tall tower of Swamp Castle."
          SIR LAUNCELOT's eyes light up with holy inspiration.
          "Monty Python and the Holy Grail" PYTHON (MONTY)
          PICTURES LTD

          --
          You received this message from the "vim_multibyte" maillist.
          For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
        • Bram Moolenaar
          ... Ah, OK. ... It s weird that digraphs are defined for an area that doesn t have characters assigned to it. I wonder what happened here. Perhaps this
          Message 4 of 8 , Apr 11, 2010
          • 0 Attachment
            Tony Mechelynck wrote:

            > >> 1. (Minor bug): On this system (gvim 7.2.411, Huge version with
            > >> GTK2-GNOME GUI), typing Ctrl-K in Insert mode followed by two spaces
            > >> doesn't give the expected result: instead of U+00A0 ("Alt-space", the
            > >> non-breaking space) I get U+E000, a CJK character. Ctrl-K NS works
            > >> correctly.
            > >
            > > Why do you expect CTRL-K<space> <space> to produce 0xa0? According to
            > > http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1345.html it's 0xe000.
            >
            > Because of the following paragraph at lines 99-100 of digraph.txt:
            >
            > ----8<----
            > > For CTRL-K, there is one general digraph: CTRL-K <Space> {char} will enter
            > > {char} with the highest bit set. You can use this to enter meta-characters.
            > ---->8----
            >
            > When {char} is 0x20 i.e. <Space>, the above tells me that CTRL-K <Space>
            > <Space> gives 0xA0 i.e. the non-breaking space, which is useful to enter
            > the "meta-character" Meta-Space if I don't remember the NS digraph. If
            > U+E000 is a "private use" character, I don't see why it needs a digraph
            > of its own anyway.

            Ah, OK.

            > On reading that RFC, which states in its beginning paragraph that it has
            > no normative value whatsoever, I see (at the very end of section 3)
            > quite a number of digraphs and trigraphs assigned to U+E000 to U+E028,
            > in what Unicode calls a "private use area": see for instance the very
            > start of http://www.unicode.org/charts/pdf/UE000.pdf:
            >
            > ----8<----
            > Private Use Area
            > Range: E000–F8FF
            > The Private Use Area does not contain any character assignments,
            > consequently no character code charts or namelists are provided for this
            > area.
            > ---->8----
            >
            > At least some of the characters listed there in the RFC have a different
            > Unicode codepoint assigned to them, but maybe Unicode assigned them
            > after the RFC (dated June 1992) was published. Personally I have strong
            > doubts as to the usefulness of any Vim digraph for a "private use"
            > character. U+E000 is listed as "indicates unfinished (Mnemonic)". I'm
            > not sure what that means, unless maybe that a blank space in a charset
            > chart (further down in the same RFC) indicates that the chart is unfinished?

            It's weird that digraphs are defined for an area that doesn't have
            characters assigned to it. I wonder what happened here. Perhaps this
            changed at some point in time? If we know the reason we may want to
            drop all the dibgraphs for 0xexxx.


            > >> 2. U+E000 is displayed in gvim as CJK halfwidth. Shouldn't it be fullwidth?
            > >
            > > Why would it be a double-width character? In
            > > http://unicode.org/Public/UNIDATA/EastAsianWidth.txt it's marked as
            > > "private use".
            >
            > Ah, I see. FWIW my usual 'guifont' has a glyph for it, which AFAICT is a
            > fullwidth CJK glyph. OTOH the Unihan database does not mention it.
            >
            > >
            > >> 3. "\<Char-nnnn>" gives wrong results for some Unicode codepoints.
            > [...]
            > >
            > > The form "\<xxx>" is for special keys, not characters. For the character
            > > itself use \x or \u or \U. See ":help expr-string".
            > > The special keys are escaped for use in a mapping.
            >
            > The example given at |expr-string| is "\<C-W>" which is the "<control>"
            > character defined by ASCII as 0x17 ("\x17") and by Unicode as U+0017
            > ("\u0017"), not a "special" non-ASCII key like <F8>, <Home> or
            > <PageDown>. I had always thought that _every_ <> name could be used in a
            > double-quoted string with a backslash prefix, and indeed I have verified
            > that it works for all the <Char-nnnn> or <Char-0xnnnn> that I tested
            > _except_ those whose UTF-8 expansion includes either or both of the
            > bytes 0x80 and 0x9B, in which case two spurious bytes are inserted
            > immediately after every occurrence of a 0x80 or 0x9B byte.
            >
            > If this bug is WONTFIX, I suggest to mention explicitly at the bottom of
            > the list under |expr-quote| that the \<xxx> form does not apply if xxx
            > is Char-nnnn or Char-0xnnnn.

            Yes.

            --
            SOLDIER: Where did you get the coconuts?
            ARTHUR: Through ... We found them.
            SOLDIER: Found them? In Mercea. The coconut's tropical!
            "Monty Python and the Holy Grail" PYTHON (MONTY) PICTURES LTD

            /// Bram Moolenaar -- Bram@... -- http://www.Moolenaar.net \\\
            /// sponsor Vim, vote for features -- http://www.Vim.org/sponsor/ \\\
            \\\ download, build and distribute -- http://www.A-A-P.org ///
            \\\ help me help AIDS victims -- http://ICCF-Holland.org ///

            --
            You received this message from the "vim_multibyte" maillist.
            For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php

            To unsubscribe, reply using "remove me" as the subject.
          • Tony Mechelynck
            On 11/04/10 16:33, Bram Moolenaar wrote: [...] ... [...] My guess is that when that RFC was drafted in 1992, some of the charsets they wanted to list used a
            Message 5 of 8 , Apr 11, 2010
            • 0 Attachment
              On 11/04/10 16:33, Bram Moolenaar wrote:
              [...]
              > It's weird that digraphs are defined for an area that doesn't have
              > characters assigned to it. I wonder what happened here. Perhaps this
              > changed at some point in time? If we know the reason we may want to
              > drop all the dibgraphs for 0xexxx.
              [...]

              My guess is that when that RFC was drafted in 1992, some of the charsets
              they wanted to list used a few characters which, at that time, weren't
              clearly assigned to one Unicode codepoint, and that the RFC authors
              arbitrarily (and maybe temporarily) placed these characters in a
              "private use area", which is the only place where "characters not yet
              assigned a Unicode codepoint" may go. This is only a guess, however. I'm
              not sure how many people are reading this (extremely low-volume) ML, but
              maybe someone knows the history of those mnemonics from RFC 1345 better
              than you and I do? If someone with that knowledge is reading this,
              please speak up.

              IMHO it makes no sense to have digraphs in Vim for "private use"
              characters. I propose to drop any of them that cannot be usefully
              reassigned to some "official" Unicode codepoint elsewhere. E000 to E028
              means forty-one codepoints, it ought not to be a big problem.


              Best regards,
              Tony.
              --
              LAUNCELOT: At last! A call! A cry of distress ...
              (he draws his sword, and turns to CONCORDE)
              Concorde! Brave, Concorde ... you shall not have died in vain!
              CONCORDE: I'm not quite dead, sir ...
              "Monty Python and the Holy Grail" PYTHON (MONTY)
              PICTURES LTD

              --
              You received this message from the "vim_multibyte" maillist.
              For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php

              To unsubscribe, reply using "remove me" as the subject.
            • Bram Moolenaar
              ... Searching revealed a few proposals for these character ranges. And this page has a confusing summary:
              Message 6 of 8 , Apr 11, 2010
              • 0 Attachment
                Tony Mechelynck wrote:

                > On 11/04/10 16:33, Bram Moolenaar wrote:
                > [...]
                > > It's weird that digraphs are defined for an area that doesn't have
                > > characters assigned to it. I wonder what happened here. Perhaps this
                > > changed at some point in time? If we know the reason we may want to
                > > drop all the dibgraphs for 0xexxx.
                > [...]
                >
                > My guess is that when that RFC was drafted in 1992, some of the charsets
                > they wanted to list used a few characters which, at that time, weren't
                > clearly assigned to one Unicode codepoint, and that the RFC authors
                > arbitrarily (and maybe temporarily) placed these characters in a
                > "private use area", which is the only place where "characters not yet
                > assigned a Unicode codepoint" may go. This is only a guess, however. I'm
                > not sure how many people are reading this (extremely low-volume) ML, but
                > maybe someone knows the history of those mnemonics from RFC 1345 better
                > than you and I do? If someone with that knowledge is reading this,
                > please speak up.
                >
                > IMHO it makes no sense to have digraphs in Vim for "private use"
                > characters. I propose to drop any of them that cannot be usefully
                > reassigned to some "official" Unicode codepoint elsewhere. E000 to E028
                > means forty-one codepoints, it ought not to be a big problem.

                Searching revealed a few proposals for these character ranges. And
                this page has a confusing summary:
                http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Unicode/Character_reference/E000-EFFF
                "private use" but it does have a table with characters.

                Let's remove these digraphs. I can't imagine anyone is using them.

                --
                Clothes make the man. Naked people have little or no influence on society.
                -- Mark Twain (Samuel Clemens) (1835-1910)

                /// Bram Moolenaar -- Bram@... -- http://www.Moolenaar.net \\\
                /// sponsor Vim, vote for features -- http://www.Vim.org/sponsor/ \\\
                \\\ download, build and distribute -- http://www.A-A-P.org ///
                \\\ help me help AIDS victims -- http://ICCF-Holland.org ///

                --
                You received this message from the "vim_multibyte" maillist.
                For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php

                To unsubscribe, reply using "remove me" as the subject.
              • Tony Mechelynck
                ... [...] ... Yes; in my browser and with my usual font most (but not all) of them are CJK fullwidth ideograms and full-width counterparts of halfwidth math
                Message 7 of 8 , Apr 12, 2010
                • 0 Attachment
                  On 11/04/10 17:33, Bram Moolenaar wrote:
                  >
                  > Tony Mechelynck wrote:
                  [...]
                  >> IMHO it makes no sense to have digraphs in Vim for "private use"
                  >> characters. I propose to drop any of them that cannot be usefully
                  >> reassigned to some "official" Unicode codepoint elsewhere. E000 to E028
                  >> means forty-one codepoints, it ought not to be a big problem.
                  >
                  > Searching revealed a few proposals for these character ranges. And
                  > this page has a confusing summary:
                  > http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Unicode/Character_reference/E000-EFFF
                  > "private use" but it does have a table with characters.

                  Yes; in my browser and with my usual font most (but not all) of them are
                  CJK fullwidth ideograms and full-width counterparts of halfwidth math
                  symbols etc. A few are (halfwidth) Latin accented letters which even
                  exist in Latin1 i.e. below U+0100 !!! For instance (in my browser)
                  U+E023 to U+E081 look like duplicates of ASCII 0x21 to 0x7E in the same
                  order. Note however the last sentence immediately before the table:

                  «The repertoire seen with your computer's font will most likely not be
                  the same as with other computers or fonts.»

                  And indeed I see a different glyph for those codepoints in gvim with my
                  usual 'guifont', which is not the same as my browser's usual serif and
                  sans-serif fonts.

                  >
                  > Let's remove these digraphs. I can't imagine anyone is using them.
                  >

                  Neither can I.


                  Best regards,
                  Tony.
                  --
                  LAUNCELOT leaps into SHOT with a mighty cry and runs the GUARD
                  through and
                  hacks him to the floor. Blood. Swashbuckling music (perhaps).
                  LAUNCELOT races through into the castle screaming.
                  SECOND SENTRY: Hey!
                  "Monty Python and the Holy Grail" PYTHON (MONTY)
                  PICTURES LTD

                  --
                  You received this message from the "vim_multibyte" maillist.
                  For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.