Re: next-error refactoring

[Juri Linkov <juri@jurta.org>]

Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:
>     Yes, and I think maintenance will be easier if next-error
>     functionality is in its own file.
>
> Why do you think it would matter?
>
> next-error and related functions are just 150 lines.
> I don't want to split things into new files which are so small.

It has a big potential to grow.  I have about 40 lines uninstalled
(next-error-highlight related code), because of unresolved issues
regarding the right name of the whole framework.  Plus Dan Nicolaescu
proposed the code for next-error-follow-minor-mode (50 lines) which
should go into the same file.  So even without Ted's plans to
extend it, this gives enough lines to split it into a new file.

BTW, replace.el should be split too.  All occur related functions
should be moved from replace.el into a separate file occur.el, because
they are already 460 lines.  This is big enough to justify its
refactoring.  Moreover, occur absolutely don't fit into replace.el
neither by its name nor by description which is according to the first
line of replace.el is "replace.el --- replace commands for Emacs".

-- 
Juri Linkov
http://www.jurta.org/emacs/