Re: skeleton.el _ versus @, a new patch

[Joe Kelsey <joe@zircon.seattle.wa.us>]

On Wed, 2003-04-23 at 18:50, Richard Stallman wrote:
>     The behavior I propose adds a new character whose only purpose is to
>     provide an alternate method to set skeleton-point without interacting
>     with regions at all.  Therefore, the proposal I have made will set
>     skeleton-point to the first occurrence of either - or _ while preserving
>     the original semantics of both @ and _ otherwise.
> 
> It seems logical.  Are there skeletons that use - that might break
> with this change?  (Is it meaningful to use - in a skeleton now?  Is
> that an error?)

A skeleton is basically a list.  Each element of the list is either a
string, a piece of lisp code, a sub-skeleton list or something to be
reinterpreted by skeleton-internal-1, basically anything that lisp
allows as a list member.  The only reason a bare - would occur in an
existing skeleton is if someone was using it as a variable name for some
obscure purpoose.  It is quite unlikely that any existing skeleton has
any bare -'s, the only use would be as parts of strings or character
constants using the usual lisp syntax for such.

/Joe