Re: "Use font-lock-support-mode rather than calling lazy-lock-mode"

[ishikawa]

Richard Stallman wrote:
> font-lock-support-mode has a doc string because it's a variable
> and has a slot for one, but we have not documented it in the manual
> because it doesn't seem important enough to mention.
>
> Now that there is just one recommended support mode, it is even
> less important than it used to be.  So I don't think we should
> make the Emacs Manual bigger by adding it.

After searching the web looking for "font-lock-support-mode" using, I agree.

This is after checking only about two screenfuls of web page links.

It seems that about half the people who posted something about
font-lock-support-mode are aware of jit-lock mode whereas
the other half got stuck with lazy-lock mode. My guess is that people actively 
tracking the latest CVS branch (and thus the pretest version)
are well aware of jit-lock mode and the people who have not
bothered with CVS version wrote about lazy-lock vs fast-lock and
have not updated the web pages for some time.

It is a pity that a new luser who tries to use pretest version
for checking the compatibility of (somewhat old) emacs lisp code
he/she has used need to spend some extra
time looking for clues to fix some apparent problems, but
as more testers contribute code, especially the
maintainer of various packages check the compatibility with new pretest
version, the problems I have seen will disapper.

After all, this version is a pretest version and we need to share our
problems and spend time to fix them.

Also, not making emacs manul thicker is a good argument against the
addition of some paragraphs...

Thank you again.

Happy Hacking,
Chiaki Ishikawa