Re: [AUCTeX-devel] Re: Changes in font locking
"Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen(a)xemacs.org> writes:
David Kastrup writes:
> complain to you instead of to us, you accuse me of "inciting to
> riot" and declare that you can ignore reports regardless of their
> number.
s/reports/duplicate nagging/
Which you declare even before receiving such a report. And you ignore
"single nagging" because it supposedly indicates only outliers.
> I asked Artemio to report his problem, possibly including a
> screen shot for illustration. You consider bug reports abuse,
> before you even see them?
Of course not. I do consider the way you submit reports to be
abusive, though. For heaven's sake, David, you yourself feel
compelled to wrap them in a <rant> element half the time!
If I do this "half the time", it should not be difficult for you to
back up this claim with a _single_ such example. I am afraid that
your memory plays games with you (not that this is the first time I
suspect that). Such cutesies (as well as smilies) are not part of my
personal style. I prefer to let the words speak for themselves.
As for sight unseen, if Ralf is correct, I've seen it, and if
it's
the one I'm thinking of, I was unwilling to make a call then,
apparently nobody else was either, and I don't have time to do a
better job now.
Unless, of course, somebody is willing to match the effort it will
cost me. Then we can check each other, which is more effective than
trying to check myself, not to mention more fun.
You've seen Robert's patch and my comments on it, I presume, as well
as the corresponding code from Emacs I posted.
Finding out _who_ put that strange copy-syntax-table there for _what_
reason should be easy for an XEmacs developer with CVS access.
--
David Kastrup
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://calypso.tux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta