On Tue, Jan 28, 2025 at 12:49:29AM +0100, Alejandro Colomar wrote: > Hi Jason, > > On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 06:07:30PM -0500, Jason Yundt wrote: > > > I would do in a GUI exactly the same as what command-line programs do: > > > pass the raw string to whatever API prints them. If the string makes > > > sense in the current locale, it will be shown nicely. If it doesn't > > > make sense, it will display weird characters, but that's not a terrible > > > issue. Just run again with the appropriate locale. > > > > OK, but how does that API figure out what characters to display? What > > character encoding should that API use when drawing the characters? I > > think that it???s OK to replace the current recommendation, but > > pathname(7) should really explain how such an API would figure out what > > characters need to be drawn on the screen. > > That's not a pathname issue anymore. It's just the issue of printing > bytes to a user. I don't think pathname(7) should talk about how bytes > are shown to a user. Where should it be documented, then? > That wouldn't affect at all how applications handle files. > > For example, I have just installed my new laptop (with the C locale), > and nab's name shows as ??????. I expect a Japanese filename to be > shown similarly, although that depends on what each application wants to > do. It doesn't really matter, since it's just a cosmetic issue. The > string still contains the appropriate bytes, even if I can't read them > properly. If I had a file called nab in cyrillic, I would expect ls(1) > to similarly show ??????, but internally just handle it well, because it > doesn't even look at the bytes; it just passes them through. > > > Have a lovely night! > Alex > > -- > <https://www.alejandro-colomar.es/>
