Re: CEDET non-regression bug fixes

[Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>]

> --- lisp/cedet/semantic/fw.el	2012-10-07 12:07:12 +0000
> +++ lisp/cedet/semantic/fw.el	2012-10-27 19:55:04 +0000
> @@ -421,14 +421,7 @@
>  	 ;; Don't prompt to insert a template if we visit an empty file
>  	 (auto-insert nil)
>  	 ;; We don't want emacs to query about unsafe local variables
> -	 (enable-local-variables
> -	  (if (featurep 'xemacs)
> -	      ;; XEmacs only has nil as an option?
> -	      nil
> -	    ;; Emacs 23 has the spiffy :safe option, nil otherwise.
> -	    (if (>= emacs-major-version 22)
> -		nil
> -	      :safe)))
> +	 (enable-local-variables :safe)
>  	 ;; ... or eval variables
>  	 (enable-local-eval nil)
>  	 )

Fine.

> === modified file 'lisp/cedet/semantic/symref/list.el'
> --- lisp/cedet/semantic/symref/list.el	2012-09-02 18:37:45 +0000
> +++ lisp/cedet/semantic/symref/list.el	2012-11-04 21:03:27 +0000
> @@ -69,7 +69,7 @@
>  references are organized by file and the name of the function
>  they are used in.
>  Display the references in `semantic-symref-results-mode'."
> -  (interactive (list (semantic-tag-name (semantic-complete-read-tag-buffer-deep
> +  (interactive (list (semantic-tag-name (semantic-complete-read-tag-project
>  					 "Symrefs for: "))))
>    (semantic-fetch-tags)
>    (let ((res nil)

From what you say, it's OK.

> === modified file 'lisp/cedet/semantic/complete.el'
> --- lisp/cedet/semantic/complete.el	2012-10-12 19:56:34 +0000
> +++ lisp/cedet/semantic/complete.el	2012-11-04 21:06:33 +0000
> @@ -1340,7 +1343,10 @@
 
>  (defmethod semantic-displayor-scroll-request ((obj semantic-displayor-abstract))
>    "A request to for the displayor to scroll the completion list (if needed)."
> -  (scroll-other-window))
> +  (with-selected-window (get-buffer-window "*Completions*")
> +    (if (posn-at-point (point-max))
> +	(goto-char (point-min))
> +      (scroll-up))))

This will signal an error when *Completions* is not displayed anywhere.

> -		   (buff (get-file-buffer file))
> +		   (buff (find-buffer-visiting file))

We need to do something to avoid those problems.  AFAIK there's no
reason to ever prefer get-file-buffer over find-buffer-visiting, so
maybe we should simply get rid of get-file-buffer and make it an alias
of find-buffer-visiting.


        Stefan