Re: BAD BUG (Was: Updated Windows Vim binaries with Arabic support )

[Nadim Shaikli <shaikli at yahoo dot com>]

--- "Antoine J. Mechelynck" <antoine mechelynck belgacom net> wrote:
> Bram Moolenaar <Bram moolenaar net> wrote:
>
> > Perhaps it's related to the patch that adds ETO_PDY?
> >
> [...]
> 
> The problem is: instead of Arabic glyphs (as displayed by the 6.1.300
> patched binary), I get either strange accented Latin letters or hollow
> rectangles. ga gives the correct numbers but the same strange glyphs. The
> file I tested it with was an HTML document with Arabic text (and, of course,
> Latin tags) encoded in UTF-8 with BOM. (NB: in UTF-8, the BOM defines not
> the byte-order but the fact that it is UTF-8 rather than UTF-16, UTF-32 or
> non-Unicode.)

Tony did you figure out what the problem was - I saw on the vim list that
you had some old/corrupt files (I think) hanging around; is the Arabic patch
innocent of these and other troubles ?

Steve, could you please roll-in the most recent minor change to the patch
(ie. grab version 1.10 from arabeyes' CVS - it has nothing to do with Tony's
recent remarks -- it fixes a rather minor shaping bug).  That would make what
cream is hosting/dispensing upto date with regard to the arabic patch.

Much thanks and I look forward to more feedback.

 - Nadim


__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Shopping - Send Flowers for Valentine's Day
http://shopping.yahoo.com