Re: Commenting out code in lisp

Deleting XEmacs Review from the CC list. APA> Using double-semicolon will set up the same re-indentation APA> trap Only if the surrounding code moves. The double semicolon style should indent the first semicolon to the current indent-column, and push all the blocked-out code 2 (or 3) columns to the right. The lines get a little longer, but not disasterously so unless the code is very deeply nested in the first place. APA> and make uncomment-region impossible. Not as long as it can assume that the region is double-semicolon commented. I don't know how much the existing code would have to change. I don't oppose your proposal on the grounds that ;; is better than ;;;, for sure. I just put it forward as one I like better. APA> If my proposal to comment broken or unneeded blocks of code APA> (if they shouldn't be deleted alltogether) by triple APA> semicolon makes sense, then we should make it the dafault. Well, that kinda depends on whether we would screw up usage outside of the core Lisp. I don't know anything about that, but if people are used to the single semicolon style, this would be something of a shocker. :-) APA> However, re-indenting XEmacs core lisp files (unless APA> otherwise noted explicitely) should be harmless and APA> desirable. Please, no! Reindent code that you have to touch for other reasons, OK. But gratuitous format changes create distracting diffs and conflicts in update. -- University of Tsukuba Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences Tel/fax: +81 (298) 53-5091 _________________ _________________ _________________ _________________ What are those straight lines for? "XEmacs rules."