Re: mailabbrev.el, mailalias.el and related package.

[Luc Teirlinck <teirllm@dms.auburn.edu>]

I may have to correct, or at least amend, certain comments I made
about mail-mode-header-syntax-table in a previous message concerning
the aggressive mailabbrev expansion problem.

The analysis of the problem with aggressive mailabbrev expansion was,
I believe, correct.  However my interpretation of the importance of
mail-mode-header-syntax-table in the mailabbrev expansion process may
not have been.  What definitely is important is the step performed
there in the definition of mail-abbrev-syntax-table.

First of all, what I erroneously referred to as "the documentation
string" were actually the comments.

Secondly, it probably is possible to perform mailabbrev expansion
correctly using only mail-abbrev-syntax-table, by invoking the lines:

             (or (and (integerp last-command-char)
                      (eq (char-syntax last-command-char) ?_))

AFTER establishing the correct mail-abbrev-syntax-table and replacing
the ?_ in this code by ?w

That should be carefully checked, however.  

The intent of mail-mode-header-syntax-table as a separate syntax-table
may indeed only have been the forward-sexp stuff.  That is not the
only intent of the syntactic changes performed there, however.

To determine whether I keep or eliminate mail-mode-header-syntax-table
in my new package, I will have to check whether I need it elsewhere.

In essence, in my previous message, I confused the syntax table itself
with the actual syntactic steps performed there.

On another topic, in a previous message I sent to you, I
unintentionally deleted the CC field.  When I noticed this, I sent a
separate copy to emacs-devel@gnu.org.  I am sorry if this caused any
problems or confusion.

_______________________________________________
Emacs-devel mailing list
Emacs-devel@gnu.org
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel