X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date
	:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type
	:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=default; b=OgbTKpa94Kjin1QW
	tsM76sqJXlO0pMKnuYQnrFYfXsHVtygkwVcsCzz6LgUzF385jDIvtaWRtFR9KmlO
	pZyRJfwx6A9UFlPl27b32A0W4jVdbQZiVEQTvpqG0fSyvqAO8mBJYnsin97T1TGD
	5ltwDKlrI4Pokq/oRFaTdJ5AUeg=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date
	:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type
	:content-transfer-encoding; s=default; bh=f0dUWYVK3dqYi9P7klVAGH
	mfzPs=; b=Tu3OspgQPWMrN9t/XGth97sz5x0n1tt+zi6TQsRwgGK8AVdElDtmzi
	WaR+U33/SeZcKiE2VwdUBMpFSLRDM0fERaWeemNJPrlgb9bWncpPCQCuSRGYIOia
	goppdzsqV/Fxv1RKMaoSUhhpzj0gtrz550V+OJt+ZYq4SQiWtYs68=
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-0.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,HTML_MESSAGE,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=enquire, vote, 04092018, 04.09.2018
X-HELO: mout.kundenserver.de
Subject: Re: Cygwin fails to utilize Unicode replacement character
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <20180903210258 DOT GC6350 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <5b8db27e DOT 1c69fb81 DOT e3b47 DOT 6cd8 AT mx DOT google DOT com> <20180904090000 DOT GD6350 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <1916096d-5359-e549-8b77-7761cb8ea04d AT gmail DOT com>
From: Thomas Wolff <towo AT towo DOT net>
Message-ID: <e05669ed-c05b-684c-10b1-7af2a12657ae@towo.net>
Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2018 16:18:21 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1916096d-5359-e549-8b77-7761cb8ea04d@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-IsSubscribed: yes


On 04.09.2018 14:49, David Macek wrote:
> On 4. 9. 2018 11:00, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>> We either keep 0xfffd now and the user gets the nodef glyph, or I revert
>> the patch and let the console print 0x2592 MEDIUM SHADE again.
>>
>> Decision has to be made today.  I will release 2.11.1 tomorrow.
>
> I vote for keeping the patch and printing 0xFFFD.  It's okay in the 
> default case,
> it's exactly what was requested in the non-standard font case and it's 
> future
> proof in case ConHost implements rendering using fallback fonts.
>
My vote is against the patch because the nodef glyph will often be just 
blank space which is certainly worse than ▒.
If conhost does not provide a reasonable way to enquire 0xFFFD 
availability it's conhost's fault, not cygwin's so why should cygwin 
implement a bad compromise. If conhost ever improves, cygwin can adapt.
Thomas

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple