Jason Rumney wrote: >
> John Brown writes: > >> On Linux (Ubuntu 12.04 - Precise Pangolin) I see that emacs 23.3.1 >> displays all the symbols in the default font (whatever it was; I >> did not have to change it) and in any other font that I tried, >> although on Linux only a handful of fonts were available. > > ... By comparison, Windows > might come with more variety of fonts ... but the coverage is > missing some Basic Plane characters ... and has few (if any) > characters from the supplemental planes. > I see. So if I have a font that includes all the characters, then all will be well. However, there is a little more to it than that. By that I mean: - When I select "Courier New", then the 4th character in the line below APL in the demo file (after the 1st V) is displayed as 2373 in a box. `C-u C-x =' tells me that the code point is #x2373 and no font is available. - When I examine the "SUBSCRIPT 2" in the chemical formula 2H₂ + O₂ ⇌ 2H₂O (and the 2 is displayed correctly), emacs tells me that the font is BatangChe and the code point is #x2082 So in the case of "SUBSCRIPT 2" the font was substituted. - However, when I select "DejaVu Sans Mono", #x2373 (which could not be displayed in Courier New) now appears and emacs says that the font is DejaVu Sans Mono. - I say all of this to say that since emacs displayed #x2082 in BatangChe while my default font was Courier New, it could have displayed #x2373 in DejaVu Sans Mono. It lied when it said that there was no font available, or it was mistaken if you want to be charitable. Can anyone say how emacs identifies a font that contains a glyph that is not present in its current default font, and why it failed to find DejaVu Sans Mono? It is not that important; I was just testing emacs on a UTF-8 demo file. Regards, John Brown.
