Let's get some more opinions. Moving to xemacs-beta from xemacs-patches.
Michael Sperber writes:
"Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen(a)xemacs.org> writes:
> Michael Sperber writes:
> > * simple-more.el:
> Isn't there a better place in xemacs-base for these (I grant
that
> they're commonly-enough used that fsf-compat is wrong)? Hm. Maybe not.
:-) I'm open for suggestions.
We surely don't need both "simple-more.el" and "subr-more.el".
(In
fact, I mistook one for the other already. I prefer the name
"simple-more"; I can't see any reason why the functions currently in
subr-more.el would ever be considered "primitives." But that would be
more work for you (or whoever adds the simple-more functions) since I
think at least one package already requires simple-subr.
BTW, subr-more.el sucks. The docstring of `number-sequence' displays
a complete misunderstanding of floating point arithmetic. (Floating
point *arithmetic* is *not* "inexact"; it's that many numbers that can
be exactly represented with decimal numerals cannot be exactly
*represented* as binary floating point numbers in the computer).
`string-match-p' uses `match-data' and `store-match-data' rather than
`save-match-data' (may be safer since it uses an unwind-protect).
`add-to-history' is broken, it uses delete on a list without a set.
N.B. The relevant sexp in our `read-from-minibuffer' does it right.
I'm also not sure I agree with `add-to-history's logic, but it's not
too bad, and I think I know how to improve it bug-compatibly.
I'll try to get around to fixing and pushing by the weekend, but no
promises.
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta