bug#63731: [PATCH] Support Emoji Variation Sequence 16 (FE0F) where appropriate

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Robert Pluim <rpluim@gmail.com>
> Cc: 63731@debbugs.gnu.org,  steven@stebalien.com
> Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2023 15:30:18 +0200
> 
>     Eli> OK, the issue is quite clear even without stepping with a debugger.
> 
>     Eli> Bottom line: we cannot support a situation where the same character
>     Eli> can be composed by more than one slot in composition-function-table.
>     Eli> If there are more than a single slot for the same character, one of
>     Eli> them will be tried, and the rest will be ignored (not even tried).
>     Eli> In particular, if a character CH has a "forward" composition rule 
> that
>     Eli> starts with itself, and also has a "backward" rule (one with non-zero
>     Eli> look-back parameter) triggered by a different character (which should
>     Eli> follow CH), the latter rule will never be tried.
> 
> OK, that makes sense. Where would be a good place to document this?

In the doc string of composition-function-table, I think.  We already
document there the caveat of arranging rules in descending order of
look-back, which is part of the same "misfeature".

>     Eli> Which means that to have #xFE0F compose correctly with Emoji
>     Eli> codepoints, we should include #xFE0F in the sequences in 
> emoji-zwj.el.
> 
> Thatʼs easy enough:
> 
> diff --git a/admin/unidata/emoji-zwj.awk b/admin/unidata/emoji-zwj.awk
> index 7d2ff6cb900..d1195ebbad8 100644
> --- a/admin/unidata/emoji-zwj.awk
> +++ b/admin/unidata/emoji-zwj.awk
> @@ -106,7 +106,8 @@ END {
>  
>       for (elt in ch)
>      {
> -        printf("(#x%s .\n,(eval-when-compile (regexp-opt\n'(\n%s\n))))\n", 
> elt, vec[elt])
> +        entries = sprintf("%s\n\"\\N{U+%s}\\N{U+FE0F}\"", vec[elt], elt)
> +        printf("(#x%s .\n,(eval-when-compile (regexp-opt\n'(\n%s\n))))\n", 
> elt, entries)
>      }
>       print "))"
>       print "  (set-char-table-range composition-function-table"
> 
> That makes all the VS-16 sequences in
> admin/unidata/emoji-variation-sequences.txt display with the emoji
> font for me.

Ready to install this on the emacs-29 branch?

>     Eli> The reason why "C-u C-x =" lies to us saying there's a composition
>     Eli> where really there isn't is because descr-text.el uses the
>     Eli> find-composition primitive, whose implementation is parallel and
>     Eli> separate from that of the display-engine routines, and is structured
>     Eli> differently.  So find-composition does succeed to detect the second
>     Eli> rule, the one triggered by #xFE0F, which the display engine ignores.
>     Eli> I will think whether this can be fixed, to avoid such false 
> positives,
>     Eli> but if we accept that there can be only one set of composition rules
>     Eli> for a character, then we basically invoked undefined behavior here,
>     Eli> and we got what we deserved.
> 
> If find-composition DTRT, could we not use it in the display engine?

Not easily, because the display code calls subroutines of
find-composition in a certain order, and that's what causes the
behavior I described.

And even if we could make this happen, I'm not sure we should:
basically, having multiple matching slots would mean users and callers
will never be sure which one "wins".