From: no-spam@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm)
Cc: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
Subject: Re: `match-data' set improperly
Date: 13 Feb 2003 13:25:16 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5xfzqsl64z.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <001301c2d32b$17f71b40$6200a8c0@swift.xxx>
"Matt Swift" <swift@alum.mit.edu> writes:
> I stand corrected.
>
> Nevertheless I see a strong case for revising both the documentation and the
> behavior of the function.
I have fixed the documentation for match-data, so that it explicitly
states that the return value is undefined if the last search failed.
I don't see a strong reason to change the behaviour; it's worked like this
for many years, so people seem to be able to cope with it.
I think the code is generally easier to understand if there is an
explicit test on the return value of the search command.
On the other hand, I don't object (but I'm not the one to decide!!) to
changing this behaviour in the way you suggest (i.e. make the various
match-* functions return nil if the last search failed).
Maybe you can write a patch (it can be isolated to search.c I think),
so we can see what's needed?
> The second sentence you quote is almost meaningless. "did not do
> this" -- did not do WHAT? alter it, or not alter it? Likewise, one
> cannot tell what might be changed to what in the future.
At least it cleary (:-)) indicates that you should not rely on the
return value, neither now, nor in the future.
--
Kim F. Storm http://www.cua.dk
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-02-13 12:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-02-13 0:54 `match-data' set improperly Luc Teirlinck
2003-02-13 6:42 ` Matt Swift
2003-02-13 12:25 ` Kim F. Storm [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-02-12 3:16 Matthew Swift
2003-02-12 10:53 ` Kim F. Storm
2003-02-12 19:25 ` Matt Swift
[not found] ` <mailman.1845.1045043916.21513.bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org>
2003-02-12 16:02 ` Kevin Rodgers
2003-02-13 10:08 ` Richard Stallman
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=5xfzqsl64z.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk \
--to=no-spam@cua.dk \
--cc=bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).