[Unless sanity has prevailed while I wasn't looking, this thread is
illegal in Australia. I have two words for the censors in the
Australian Government -- "Bite me."]
Didier Verna <verna(a)inf.enst.fr> writes in xemacs-beta(a)xemacs.org:
> Steve Baur wrote:
>> I have no idea where this code is from.
> No idea either, but I've just noticed that terminal.el (from os-utils)
> is full of these.
But there's nothing in it that would account for the backtrace William
posted.
terminal.el has a special exemption with regard to the language used in
it. Ordinarily, I don't want code in XEmacs that will display such
language to the user in messages (comments are fine). When the censors
in the US passed the so-called "Communications Decency Act" Richard
censored terminal.el and the rest of Emacs. XEmacs deliberately wasn't
censored. Anyway, terminal.el has historical significance, even if
it's in a deliberately ugly sort of way.
Besides, under the prevailing XEmacs coding standards, if you patch an
unmaintained package (like terminal.el) you become the owner of it,
and the code in terminal.el is pretty much garbage nobody wants to
maintain. If necessary, we can remove it altogether since we have
eterm as a replacement.