Re: ediff and coding systems

[Dan Nicolaescu <dann@ics.uci.edu>]

kifer@cs.sunysb.edu (Michael Kifer) writes:

  > > kifer@cs.sunysb.edu (Michael Kifer) writes:
  > > 
  > >   > I am using 23.0.50 - the current CVS version.
  > > 
  > > I can reproduce it with a version checked out this morning from CVS
  > > trunk and one that is about 1 week old, I don't have anything older
  > > than that. 
  > > 
  > > Is your version up to date?
  > 
  > Yes - just updated it this morning.

I don't have any other ideas of what to try...

Not related to this, but could you please look at these byte compile
warnings for viper-cmd.el?

In viper-next-line-carefully:
viper-cmd.el:2792:19:Warning: `next-line' used from Lisp code
That command is designed for interactive use only

In viper-next-line:
viper-cmd.el:3091:41:Warning: `next-line' used from Lisp code
That command is designed for interactive use only

In viper-previous-line:
viper-cmd.el:3134:41:Warning: `previous-line' used from Lisp code
That command is designed for interactive use only

Most similar warnings have been fixed in CVS, but for the above is not
obvious what to do.

In end of data:
viper-cmd.el:5099:1:Warning: the function `viper-heading-end' might
not be defined at runtime.

This one is strange


viper-cmd.el:5099:1:Warning: the following functions are not known to
be defined: quail-input-method, quail-start-translation,
    event-to-character,  character-to-event, viper-iconify, key-press-event-p, event-key,
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
   These should be optimized out by the byte compiler.

Also viper-xemacs-p is about as long as (featurep 'emacs) and as
readable. Why not replace it?  Most similar macros have been replaced
in CVS.