[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Thu, 23 Nov 2006 08:23:26 -0800
> I don't really see the problem.
> > I think kmacro needs a better presentation in the doc, with
> > some explanation of the relation to the formerly standard way
> > of doing things (macros.el and the built-ins). If kmacro is
> > meant to replace macros.el and the built-in
> > commands, then that should be done completely.
> What part is missing? Is there something which doesn't work as
I think I was clear enough in my first message - see that for details.
Whether kmacro is an alternative to the convention or is the new convention
is not clear. I suggest clearing up the doc and the source-file Commentary a
bit. If you don't find the suggestion useful, ignore it, as always.
- kmacro?, Drew Adams, 2006/11/23
- Re: kmacro?, Kim F. Storm, 2006/11/24
- RE: kmacro?,
Drew Adams <=