[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: New Package for GNU ELPA

From: Drew Adams
Subject: RE: New Package for GNU ELPA
Date: Sun, 22 May 2016 10:20:53 -0700 (PDT)

> >  '(("(\\(define-hook-helper\\)\\_>[ \t]*\\(\\(?:\\sw\\|\\s_\\)+\\)?"
> >    ("(\\(define-mode-hook-helper\\)\\_>[ \t]*\\(\\(?:\\sw\\|\\s_\\)+\\)?"
> Is there a reason why these two macros aren't highlighted properly by
> default? I don't think other packages do this.

If this is a package in GNU ELPA, shouldn't its thingies have a
package prefix?

IOW, shouldn't `define(-mode)-hook-helper' be called something like

I'm not saying it should, as the rules for GNU ELPA packages are not
clear to me.  But if its packages follow the general rule then they
should have a prefix, no?

(And if they did have a pkg prefix then no, these macros would
presumably not be highlighted by default.)

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]