Marcus Harnisch writes:
;; Is there any reason for having both, #'move-beginning-of-line
That is hideous. Who approved that, I wonder? Oh, I see. There's a
distinction between logical order and display order, so this must be
related to the recent introduction of bidi support in Emacs. We don't
support bidi (and if I have anything to say about it, it's still
hideous, and we'll provide significantly better names when we do
support bidi ;-), so just alias these.
I guesss they can go in simple.el where Emacs puts them for now, and
if and when we add bidi support, and choose to provide better names,
they can go into fsf-compat. They should be marked as compatibility
(unless (fboundp 'use-region-p)
(defalias 'use-region-p 'region-active-p))
I don't know what to do about this. This is semantically inaccurate,
IIRC. Probably this "defun-maybe" should be in the using file,
guarded as you have it.
(unless (fboundp 'looking-at-p)
(defun looking-at-p (regexp &optional buffer)
"This predicate function works like looking-at, but without updating
the match data."
(looking-at regexp buffer))))
*sigh* We should sync this one. (What we should *really* do is go to
a Python-style API where a match object is returned, but I doubt
RMS will accept that as the default.)
When that question originally came up a couple years ago, the
semantics were still under discussion at GNU. I guess it's stable
enough now to synch it.
Already done in Mercurial.
Already done in Mercurial (but I don't understand the relevance of
This is probably due to a bug in rebox2.el here:
,----[ line 2649 ]
| (re-search-forward (concat (sentence-end)
| "$") (point-at-eol) t))
Where's the bug?)
XEmacs-Beta mailing list