>>>> "Christoph" == Christoph Wedler
<Wedler> writes:
Christoph> Thus, my coding is in no way worse than the existing
Christoph> XEmacs coding.
Oh, I didn't realize that you were referring specifically to the
info-look library. D'oh. Yes, if the existing library already uses
overlay.el, we should require it.
[Note that since info-look is in the edit-utils package, it has
nothing to do with XEmacs 21.4.5. Except that it (presumably) runs in
XEmacs 21.4.5.]
Christoph> P.S. As I am not a friend of bigger Emacs-XEmacs
Christoph> differences, I can try to get some more XEmacs friendly
Christoph> coding into Emacs' version
Well, I appreciate your effort. But I don't know how much effect
there will be if most of the development is being done at GNU. The
overlay-extent difference is one of the serious technical differences
between the two implementations. I think it unlikely that the GNU
people would be willing to uglify their code to accommodate the XEmacs
extent API. And I have a hard time disagreeing, assuming they are
going to continue using the overlay API.
I would say the most likely approach would be to abstract that snippet
into a function, and conditionally define it and the global overlay it
uses depending on Emacs or XEmacs. Even if GNU doesn't want the
conditional code, that would be easier for us to synch as a fork,
since it could all be localized into a few lines in one place.
--
Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences
http://turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp
University of Tsukuba Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
Don't ask how you can "do" free software business;
ask what your business can "do for" free software.