Re: [AUCTeX-devel] Re: Changes in font locking
- First Post
- Replies
- Stats
-
Go to
- ----- 2025 -----
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2024 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2023 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2022 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2021 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2020 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2019 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2018 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2017 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2016 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2015 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2014 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2013 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2012 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2011 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2010 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2009 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2008 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2007 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2006 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2005 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2004 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2003 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2002 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2001 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2000 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 1999 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 1998 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
* David Kastrup (2007-03-13) writes:
Ralf Angeli <angeli(a)caeruleus.net> writes:
> * David Kastrup (2007-03-13) writes:
>
>> Finding out _who_ put that strange copy-syntax-table there for _what_
>> reason should be easy for an XEmacs developer with CVS access.
>
> Could have been copied from Emacs 21.
I doubt it.
Well, the call to `copy-syntax-table' is in the sources of Emacs 21.
Can't check the Emacs CVS, however, since Savannah is
down.
What do you need CVS for? `grep-find' did it for me.
2003-02-20 Stefan Monnier <monnier(a)cs.yale.edu>
* subr.el (with-syntax-table): Don't copy the table any more.
--
Ralf
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://calypso.tux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
David Kastrup
Tuesday, 13 March
Tue, 13 Mar
10:58 p.m.
New subject: [AUCTeX-devel] Re: Changes in font locking
Ralf Angeli <angeli(a)caeruleus.net> writes:
* David Kastrup (2007-03-13) writes:
> Ralf Angeli <angeli(a)caeruleus.net> writes:
>
>> * David Kastrup (2007-03-13) writes:
>>
>>> Finding out _who_ put that strange copy-syntax-table there for _what_
>>> reason should be easy for an XEmacs developer with CVS access.
>>
>> Could have been copied from Emacs 21.
>
> I doubt it.
Well, the call to `copy-syntax-table' is in the sources of Emacs 21.
> Can't check the Emacs CVS, however, since Savannah is
> down.
What do you need CVS for? `grep-find' did it for me.
2003-02-20 Stefan Monnier <monnier(a)cs.yale.edu>
* subr.el (with-syntax-table): Don't copy the table any more.
Unless nobody checked this using Emacs 21.4, it would then appear that
`copy-syntax-table' behaves indeed differently in XEmacs 21.5 and
Emacs 21.4. Which of the two would be correct, I have no idea. But
the call to `copy-syntax-table' seems like a mistake, anyway, and I am
surprised that we got no complaints from Emacs 21 users yet.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://calypso.tux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
Olivier Galibert
Wednesday, 14 March
Wed, 14 Mar
10:36 a.m.
New subject: [AUCTeX-devel] Re: Changes in font locking
On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 11:58:14PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
Ralf Angeli <angeli(a)caeruleus.net> writes:
> 2003-02-20 Stefan Monnier <monnier(a)cs.yale.edu>
>
> * subr.el (with-syntax-table): Don't copy the table any more.
Unless nobody checked this using Emacs 21.4, it would then appear that
`copy-syntax-table' behaves indeed differently in XEmacs 21.5 and
Emacs 21.4. Which of the two would be correct, I have no idea. But
the call to `copy-syntax-table' seems like a mistake, anyway, and I am
surprised that we got no complaints from Emacs 21 users yet.
We're talking about the with-syntax-table macro here? The code in
xemacs cvs and emacs-21.4a are strictly identical and include the
copy. The docstring also says that you work on a copy ("... set to a
copy of TABLE."). Did emacs-cvs change that? It's a change that does
make a lot of sense.
I guess I can't checkout emacs-cvs until savannah works again,
correct?
As for the bug with with-syntax-table/backwards-sexp, I've started
looking at it. It's interestingly hairy code.
OG.
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://calypso.tux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
Ralf Angeli
Wednesday, 14 March
Wed, 14 Mar
6:02 p.m.
New subject: [AUCTeX-devel] Re: Changes in font locking
* Olivier Galibert (2007-03-14) writes:
I guess I can't checkout emacs-cvs until savannah works again,
correct?
You could get a pretest version from
<URL:ftp://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/pretest/> if you don't need
revision-related information.
--
Ralf
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://calypso.tux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
6596
days inactive
6597
days old
3 comments
3 participants
tags (0)
participants (3)
-
David Kastrup -
Olivier Galibert -
Ralf Angeli