From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Andreas =?utf-8?q?R=C3=B6hler?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: symbol-at-point Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 20:45:21 +0200 Message-ID: <200707262045.23538.andreas.roehler@online.de> References: <200707261107.29692.andreas.roehler@online.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1185475457 6825 80.91.229.12 (26 Jul 2007 18:44:17 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 18:44:17 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Tassilo Horn , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Jul 26 20:44:15 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1IE8Jq-0006bz-UV for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 26 Jul 2007 20:44:15 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IE8Jq-0003dV-31 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 26 Jul 2007 14:44:14 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IE8Jm-0003T2-2J for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Jul 2007 14:44:10 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IE8Jj-0003HH-8o for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Jul 2007 14:44:08 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IE8Jj-0003GZ-3t for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Jul 2007 14:44:07 -0400 Original-Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.186]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1IE8Jf-00035d-GX; Thu, 26 Jul 2007 14:44:03 -0400 Original-Received: from [84.190.174.32] (helo=karton) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (node=mrelayeu8) with ESMTP (Nemesis), id 0ML31I-1IE8Je0j1A-0003hb; Thu, 26 Jul 2007 20:44:02 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.8.2 In-Reply-To: Content-Disposition: inline X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+nrRNtLoZds4VV1gaLmTuR+ydAa29pNxdQV+T Rgo3+mw/ZQCB9qkbtck836BaLwXMtmfhLT+0vw0uphj83PTi2e c+3ohUTkYs0dkqX0gFkTA== X-detected-kernel: Linux 2.6? (barebone, rare!) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:75600 Archived-At: Am Donnerstag, 26. Juli 2007 14:20 schrieb Eli Zaretskii: > > From: Andreas =?iso-8859-1?q?R=F6hler?= > > Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 11:07:28 +0200 > > > > These return THING as a substring of buffer, doing > > nothing else, whereas symbol-at-point interns existing > > THING unconditionally > > And why is that bad, actually? > Probably my concern is solely imaginative: let's consider a case, where a program checks for symbolp and makes action depend from it. Then you may have changed situation by calling symbol-at-point while editing some code. Its a little bit as url-at-point would not simply return the string, but follow that url then. Or email-at-point would call the mailer. Andreas Roehler