Re: [Fwd: Re: beginning-of-defun]

[Andreas Roehler]

Richard Stallman schrieb:
> Thanks for starting to explore this issue.
>
> Because it only finds `defun' calls, it fails to find other constructs
> that define functions or macros.  Also, it would get rather confused
> when dealing with top-level forms that don't define functions at all:
> it just skips them.
>
>   

Correct my answer in this point. Here a hopefully better one:

What was sent indeed was a `beginning-of-defun' in his
true understanding (as I conceive that) - nothing more.

After that we could have a function dealing with a
group of function-forms in Emacs Lisp while extending
the reg-rexp appropriate, i.e. a `beginning-of-function'.

__
Andreas Roehler