From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel,gmane.emacs.xemacs.design
Subject: Re: Rationale for split-string?
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 21:54:56 -0400
Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org
Message-ID: <E196L5c-00060U-00@fencepost.gnu.org>
References: <87brz57at2.fsf@tleepslib.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
	<uvfxduzt2.fsf@riic.at>
Reply-To: rms@gnu.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org
X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1050630984 5045 80.91.224.249 (18 Apr 2003 01:56:24 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 01:56:24 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Fri Apr 18 03:56:18 2003
Return-path: <emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org>
Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244])
	by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
	id 196L6w-0001Im-00
	for <emacs-devel@main.gmane.org>; Fri, 18 Apr 2003 03:56:18 +0200
Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173])
	by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian))
	id 196LA2-0004v5-00
	for <emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org>; Fri, 18 Apr 2003 03:59:30 +0200
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13)
	id 196L6y-0006Vk-04
	for emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org; Thu, 17 Apr 2003 21:56:20 -0400
Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10.13)
	id 196L6d-0006TM-00
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 17 Apr 2003 21:55:59 -0400
Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10.13)
	id 196L6c-0006Oi-00
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 17 Apr 2003 21:55:59 -0400
Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164])
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13)
	id 196L5c-0005qM-00
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 17 Apr 2003 21:54:56 -0400
Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.10)
	id 196L5c-00060U-00; Thu, 17 Apr 2003 21:54:56 -0400
Original-To: Stefan =?iso-8859-1?q?Reich=F6r?= <xsteve@riic.at>
In-reply-to: <uvfxduzt2.fsf@riic.at> (message from Stefan
	=?iso-8859-1?q?Reich=F6r?= on Thu, 17 Apr 2003 13:30:01 +0200)
Original-cc: xemacs-design@xemacs.org
Original-cc: stephen@xemacs.org
X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1b5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Emacs development discussions. <emacs-devel.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-devel@gnu.org>
List-Subscribe: <http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mail.gnu.org/pipermail/emacs-devel>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org
Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:13271 gmane.emacs.xemacs.design:2053
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:13271

    I would welcome, if the GNU Emacs and XEmacs would have the same
    split-string implementation.

I know of no reason to want them to be different.