RE: [External] : forward-sexp

[Drew Adams]

> >>> Put your cursor just before a `[' char and use `C-u C-x
> >>> ='. Same thing for a `(' char and a `"' char. What does it
> >>> say for syntax?
> >>
> >> One EASY way of solving this would be that
> >> everyone just used the Lisp syntax ...
> >
> > Solving what? If you think you see a bug, then `M-x
> > report-emacs-bug'. (I don't see any bug.) [...] Vive
> > la différence!
> 
> But if everyone used the same syntax, everyone could
> access everyone's data in any way they would like.

"La différence" in question is not this person
versus that person (but that too is available,
through customization).  The difference is that
of different major modes.  And different major
modes are often for different programming or
natural _languages_.

And different languages treat different char
and sequences of chars differently.  Likewise
different kinds of textual data - "everyone's
data" is not the same.  The syntax of JSON
data is not that of XML data.

> So in a way it would be even more different
> what way. But I think it would be awkward to
> submit this as a bug to Emacs

I don't expect such a bug/ER to gain traction,
but then again, nothing specific specifying
what's requested has been presented so far.
Maybe the devil is in the details.

My point in suggesting `M-x report-emacs-bug'
is that that's how to specify some change in
behavior you'd like Emacs to adopt.  (It's not
the only way, but it is one recommended way.)

> - especially since we already use the Lisp syntax.

No, we don't.  Certainly not for many major
modes.  Otherwise, much of what a major mode
defines wouldn't even exist - from movement
(including `forward-sexp'), to font-locking,
to error handling, to ...

This is the point.  (And I'm surprised it's
not getting across more easily.)  Different
modes use different syntax.  Sometimes,
often (even most often?).  Is this really a
surprise or hard to fathom?