Re: Abbrev should preserve case

[Davis Herring]

> How would you tell the difference between `FOO' meaning "expand to the
> upper-case expansion of `foo'" (as it works now), and `FOO' a totally
> separate abbreviation? I guess you could try a case-insensitive match
> first, then a case-sensitive one if it fails. This would mean that
> `FOO' could expand to something different than `foo' only if `foo'
> were not defined as an abbrev. Seems a bit complex though.

Surely you mean do a case-sensitive search first and then insensitive? 
Obviously the sensitive one can't work if the insensitive one fails.  Then
you go on to say that "FOO" could only be -different- if there is nothing
than which to be different; instead we want to say "`FOO' can only expand
as upcased `foo' if `FOO' is not its own abbrev", right?

I'm not trying to be needlessly pedantic; rather I think what you probably
meant to say made significantly more sense as a path forward than what you
did say and so deserves consideration.

Davis

-- 
This product is sold by volume, not by mass.  If it appears too dense or
too sparse, it is because mass-energy conversion has occurred during
shipping.