[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: ?\_ patch
From: |
Miles Bader |
Subject: |
Re: ?\_ patch |
Date: |
07 Feb 2003 17:34:08 +0900 |
Luc Teirlinck <address@hidden> writes:
> As Handa pointed out, ?\_ would have broken tons of existing code,
> which, for whatever reason, used ?\_ instead of ?_ Breaking existing
> code is a big disadvantage.
I didn't see Handa's message (there was a wierd burp in the emacs-devel
mailing list, so perhaps it got nuked there...), but I did a grep and
you're right -- a bunch of code uses ?\_ to mean ?_ .
I can't imagine _why_ people did that, but they did, so I guess ?\_ is
no good. Bleah.
I really don't like the wierd double identity of ?\s, but I'm not sure
what alternative there is... Perhaps kim's idea (?\SPC), but with a less
ambiguous syntax, e.g., #\SPC or something.
Does xemacs do anything about this issue?
-Miles
--
Fast, small, soon; pick any 2.
- Re: ?\_ patch, (continued)
- Re: ?\_ patch, Luc Teirlinck, 2003/02/05
- Re: ?\_ patch, Luc Teirlinck, 2003/02/05
- Re: ?\_ patch, Luc Teirlinck, 2003/02/05
- Re: ?\_ patch, Kim F. Storm, 2003/02/06
- Re: ?\_ patch, Miles Bader, 2003/02/06
- Re: ?\_ patch, Kim F. Storm, 2003/02/06
- Re: ?\_ patch, Juanma Barranquero, 2003/02/06
- Re: ?\_ patch, Luc Teirlinck, 2003/02/06
- Re: ?\_ patch, Miles Bader, 2003/02/06
- Re: ?\_ patch, Luc Teirlinck, 2003/02/06
- Re: ?\_ patch,
Miles Bader <=
- Re: ?\_ patch, Kenichi Handa, 2003/02/07
- Re: ?\_ patch, Kim F. Storm, 2003/02/07
- Re: ?\_ patch, Miles Bader, 2003/02/07
- Re: ?\_ patch, Kim F. Storm, 2003/02/07
- Re: ?\_ patch, Miles Bader, 2003/02/07
- Re: ?\_ patch, Dmitry Paduchikh, 2003/02/07
- Re: ?\_ patch, Kim F. Storm, 2003/02/07
- Re: ?\_ patch, John Paul Wallington, 2003/02/07
- Re: ?\_ patch, Kim F. Storm, 2003/02/07
- Re: ?\_ patch, John Paul Wallington, 2003/02/07