5:32 p.m.
"JXrXme Marant" <jmarant(a)free.fr> writes:
Hi,
This is a first attempt at using patcher as well syncing with
GNU Emacs. It has been tested, I hope it works for you.
At first glance, patcher looks very nice.
Cheers,
Thanks for the patch, Jérôme!
Here are some things I noticed.
The change from
-(defcustom sh-mode-hook nil
- "*Hook run by `sh-mode'."
-:type 'hook
-:group 'sh)
-(defcustom sh-set-shell-hook nil
- "*Hook run by `sh-set-shell'."
-:type 'hook
-:group 'sh)
to the following block changes the customization group from 'sh to
'sh-script.
+(defcustom sh-set-shell-hook nil
+ "*Hook run by `sh-set-shell'."
+:type 'hook
+:group 'sh-script)
+
+(defcustom sh-mode-hook nil
+ "*Hook run by `sh-mode'."
+:type 'hook
+:group 'sh-script)
Is this incompatible change acceptable?
The removal of XEmacs comments (the usual convention is
;; XEmacs change: ...
) is normally not OK, since it's a marker for things to
watch out for.
(defcustom sh-alias-alist
- ;; XEmacs: Linux is spelled `linux'
(nconc (if (eq system-type 'linux)
'((csh . tcsh)
(ksh . pdksh)))
In this case I can't see anything wrong with this removal, though.
The following is such a loss of an XEmacs-specific change:
This should have been marked
;; XEmacs change: ...
and not
;; GDF
which is the acronym of a nowadays mostly inactive developer.
I ran out of energy here and the rest of your patch is not reviewed.
<2507 lines deleted by Adrian Aichner>
＠＠ -1578,14 +3554,11 ＠＠
(point)))
(newline))))
-
-
(defun sh-beginning-of-command ()
"Move point to successive beginnings of commands."
(interactive)
(if (re-search-backward sh-beginning-of-command nil t)
(goto-char (match-beginning 2))))
-
(defun sh-end-of-command ()
"Move point to successive ends of commands."
Above citation is the end of your mail.
It would be a good idea to use a signature or other indication for the
end of your mail.
Lost data is not unheard off, and I have no way of knowing whether
this was really the end of your mail.
Thanks again for your contribution, perhaps you could have a look at
the issues I brought up.
Best regards,
Adrian
--
Adrian Aichner
mailto:adrian＠xemacs.org
http://www.xemacs.org/
5:48 p.m.
New subject: [PATCH] Sync sh-script.el with GNU Emacs 21.4
Adrian Aichner <adrian(a)xemacs.org> writes:
Here are some things I noticed.
Thanks.
The change from
> -(defcustom sh-mode-hook nil
> - "*Hook run by `sh-mode'."
> -:type 'hook
> -:group 'sh)
>
> -(defcustom sh-set-shell-hook nil
> - "*Hook run by `sh-set-shell'."
> -:type 'hook
> -:group 'sh)
to the following block changes the customization group from 'sh to
'sh-script.
> +(defcustom sh-set-shell-hook nil
> + "*Hook run by `sh-set-shell'."
> +:type 'hook
> +:group 'sh-script)
> +
> +(defcustom sh-mode-hook nil
> + "*Hook run by `sh-mode'."
> +:type 'hook
> +:group 'sh-script)
Is this incompatible change acceptable?
I'm sorry, I shoud have review more carefully, but there wasn't
any XEmacs comments, which makes syncing more difficult.
I reintegrated anything following an XEmacs comment.
The removal of XEmacs comments (the usual convention is
;; XEmacs change: ...
) is normally not OK, since it's a marker for things to
watch out for.
> (defcustom sh-alias-alist
> - ;; XEmacs: Linux is spelled `linux'
> (nconc (if (eq system-type 'linux)
> '((csh . tcsh)
> (ksh . pdksh)))
In this case I can't see anything wrong with this removal, though.
It should have stay, I forgot to readd it.
The following is such a loss of an XEmacs-specific change:
This should have been marked
;; XEmacs change: ...
and not
;; GDF
which is the acronym of a nowadays mostly inactive developer.
I ran out of energy here and the rest of your patch is not reviewed.
<2507 lines deleted by Adrian Aichner>
> ＠＠ -1578,14 +3554,11 ＠＠
> (point)))
> (newline))))
>
> -
> -
> (defun sh-beginning-of-command ()
> "Move point to successive beginnings of commands."
> (interactive)
> (if (re-search-backward sh-beginning-of-command nil t)
> (goto-char (match-beginning 2))))
> -
>
> (defun sh-end-of-command ()
> "Move point to successive ends of commands."
>
>
Above citation is the end of your mail.
It would be a good idea to use a signature or other indication for the
end of your mail.
Lost data is not unheard off, and I have no way of knowing whether
this was really the end of your mail.
Yes, I should have sent to through gnus, which adds a signature.
Thanks again for your contribution, perhaps you could have a look at
the issues I brought up.
--
Jérôme Marant
6:45 p.m.
New subject: [PATCH] Sync sh-script.el with GNU Emacs 21.4
Adrian Aichner <adrian(a)xemacs.org> writes:
The following is such a loss of an XEmacs-specific change:
This should have been marked
;; XEmacs change: ...
and not
;; GDF
which is the acronym of a nowadays mostly inactive developer.
Ok, got it. I did not noticed, since yes, it was not tagged as XEmacs.
I ran out of energy here and the rest of your patch is not reviewed.
I hope I'm really helping and not giving more work in reviewing a
patch than doing the sync yourself (as an experienced XEmacs developer).
I guess there should be a checklist of XEmacs-specific changes
to modes somewhere, making anyone easier to Sync.
Cheers,
--
Jérôme Marant
7:05 p.m.
New subject: [PATCH] Sync sh-script.el with GNU Emacs 21.4
Jérôme Marant <jmarant(a)free.fr> writes:
Adrian Aichner <adrian(a)xemacs.org> writes:
> The following is such a loss of an XEmacs-specific change:
>
> This should have been marked
> ;; XEmacs change: ...
> and not
> ;; GDF
> which is the acronym of a nowadays mostly inactive developer.
Ok, got it. I did not noticed, since yes, it was not tagged as XEmacs.
> I ran out of energy here and the rest of your patch is not reviewed.
I hope I'm really helping and not giving more work in reviewing a
patch than doing the sync yourself (as an experienced XEmacs developer).
Oh, you are helping, Jérôme!
And I was trying to do my part.
Would be great if you could address these minor issues.
I guess there should be a checklist of XEmacs-specific changes
to modes somewhere, making anyone easier to Sync.
Well, what I wrote could be a start.
There have been other explanations in the past emails.
I am not aware of a set of syncing instructions or suggestions.
Are there any?
Best regards,
Adrian
Cheers,
--
Adrian Aichner
mailto:adrian＠xemacs.org
http://www.xemacs.org/
7:08 p.m.
New subject: [PATCH] Sync sh-script.el with GNU Emacs 21.4
Adrian Aichner <adrian(a)xemacs.org> writes:
Oh, you are helping, Jérôme!
Great then.
And I was trying to do my part.
Would be great if you could address these minor issues.
I will.
>
> I guess there should be a checklist of XEmacs-specific changes
> to modes somewhere, making anyone easier to Sync.
Well, what I wrote could be a start.
There have been other explanations in the past emails.
I am not aware of a set of syncing instructions or suggestions.
Are there any?
Not instructions. Just writing down the list of changes per
per package, as a TODO list for instance.
--
Jérôme Marant
8:33 p.m.
New subject: [PATCH] Sync sh-script.el with GNU Emacs 21.4
Adrian Aichner <adrian(a)xemacs.org> writes:
The change from
> -(defcustom sh-mode-hook nil
> - "*Hook run by `sh-mode'."
> -:type 'hook
> -:group 'sh)
>
> -(defcustom sh-set-shell-hook nil
> - "*Hook run by `sh-set-shell'."
> -:type 'hook
> -:group 'sh)
to the following block changes the customization group from 'sh to
'sh-script.
> +(defcustom sh-set-shell-hook nil
> + "*Hook run by `sh-set-shell'."
> +:type 'hook
> +:group 'sh-script)
> +
> +(defcustom sh-mode-hook nil
> + "*Hook run by `sh-mode'."
> +:type 'hook
> +:group 'sh-script)
Is this incompatible change acceptable?
This change was made in 1999 and is undocumented BTW.
What shall be done?
--
Jérôme Marant
9:17 p.m.
New subject: [PATCH] Sync sh-script.el with GNU Emacs 21.4
On Sun, 2005-10-09 at 21:33 +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote:
Adrian Aichner <adrian(a)xemacs.org> writes:
> The change from
>
>> -(defcustom sh-mode-hook nil
>> - "*Hook run by `sh-mode'."
>> -:type 'hook
>> -:group 'sh)
>>
>> -(defcustom sh-set-shell-hook nil
>> - "*Hook run by `sh-set-shell'."
>> -:type 'hook
>> -:group 'sh)
>
> to the following block changes the customization group from 'sh to
> 'sh-script.
>
>> +(defcustom sh-set-shell-hook nil
>> + "*Hook run by `sh-set-shell'."
>> +:type 'hook
>> +:group 'sh-script)
>> +
>> +(defcustom sh-mode-hook nil
>> + "*Hook run by `sh-mode'."
>> +:type 'hook
>> +:group 'sh-script)
>
> Is this incompatible change acceptable?
This change was made in 1999 and is undocumented BTW.
What shall be done?
My .02€: I don't think changing it would cause any real world problems,
and sh-script could look a bit better in the customization menu than sh.
10 p.m.
New subject: [PATCH] Sync sh-script.el with GNU Emacs 21.4
Ville Skyttä <scop(a)xemacs.org> writes:
> This change was made in 1999 and is undocumented BTW.
> What shall be done?
My .02€: I don't think changing it would cause any real world problems,
and sh-script could look a bit better in the customization menu than sh.
It think that this shouldn't bring many inconveniences too, while not
being anyone's spokesman ...
--
Jérôme Marant
7026
days inactive
7026
days old
7 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Adrian Aichner -
Jérôme Marant -
Ville Skyttä