From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Drew Adams" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: RE: Is there any elisp functions to tell whether the cursor is in a comment block? Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 15:06:26 -0700 Message-ID: <002601c8e6c7$077ad530$0200a8c0@us.oracle.com> References: <87tzetis7w.fsf@DEBLAP1.BeNet> <71bcf427-442c-45b8-95d6-5f8289c85297@z72g2000hsb.googlegroups.com> <87iqv8sdyi.fsf@DEBLAP1.BeNet> <87mykk1b1r.fsf@DEBLAP1.BeNet><487BDF2F.8010202@gmail.com> <487C526A.6010806@gmail.com> <003201c8e685$3d7f9770$0200a8c0@us.oracle.com> <487D0D8B.7050907@gmail.com> <001c01c8e6c0$bd3203a0$0200a8c0@us.oracle.com> <487D17E3.3020803@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1216159700 14013 80.91.229.12 (15 Jul 2008 22:08:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 22:08:20 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 'Tom Tromey' , help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org To: "'Lennart Borgman \(gmail\)'" Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jul 16 00:09:07 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KIshh-0000rF-Qm for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 16 Jul 2008 00:09:02 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:53386 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KIsgp-0003Ll-FO for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 15 Jul 2008 18:08:07 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KIsgA-0002xX-LI for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 15 Jul 2008 18:07:26 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KIsg8-0002u6-JO for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 15 Jul 2008 18:07:25 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=55516 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KIsg8-0002tx-7I for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 15 Jul 2008 18:07:24 -0400 Original-Received: from agminet01.oracle.com ([141.146.126.228]:34573) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KIsg8-000658-1u for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 15 Jul 2008 18:07:24 -0400 Original-Received: from agmgw1.us.oracle.com (agmgw1.us.oracle.com [152.68.180.212]) by agminet01.oracle.com (Switch-3.2.4/Switch-3.1.7) with ESMTP id m6FM7KUQ032738; Tue, 15 Jul 2008 17:07:20 -0500 Original-Received: from acsmt351.oracle.com (acsmt351.oracle.com [141.146.40.151]) by agmgw1.us.oracle.com (Switch-3.2.0/Switch-3.2.0) with ESMTP id m6FB9U7e002062; Tue, 15 Jul 2008 16:07:20 -0600 Original-Received: from inet-141-146-46-1.oracle.com by acsmt351.oracle.com with ESMTP id 3709135271216159582; Tue, 15 Jul 2008 15:06:22 -0700 Original-Received: from dradamslap1 (/141.144.75.28) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Tue, 15 Jul 2008 15:06:21 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: <487D17E3.3020803@gmail.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 Thread-Index: Acjmwx0FP7nm3+ecRR+qP+W8JxJrHgAAZa0A X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAAI= X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAAI= X-Whitelist: TRUE X-Whitelist: TRUE X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.4-2.6 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:55611 Archived-At: > Yes, you are right. It can be done. For a package consisting > of several files there can be a file, say > this-package-compatibility.el, that contains this information. > For a single elisp file I think the compatibility info can be > in the file itself. So maybe your suggestion is better. > > I would suggest a shorter version of the compatibility line, like > ;; Compatibility: Emacs=20.*,21.*,22.* XEmacs=unknown If the info is to be used in some automatic way, perhaps a convention could be used that corresponds to the form of `emacs-major-version' and `emac-minor-version', or `emacs-version', perhaps with wild cards. One library might be compatible with all minor versions for Emacs 21, and another might be compatible with all minor versions of Emacs 21 after 21.1.2, and a third might be compatible with only 21.3.1... That kind of thing is not much of a problem if it is only people that read a Compatibility field. But if tools do that, then there would need to be a well-defined syntax to communicate the various possibilities unambiguously. `unknown' doesn't seem useful to me. But how should absence be interpreted, in general: as unknown or incompatible? > I would also suggest adding this information to all elisp files on > EmacsWiki. Perhaps this can be done automatically That doesn't sound like a good idea to me. I think you're asking for trouble, here. > using the dates the files where added That's definitely a bad idea, IMO - no necessary relation. > and assuming the files only works for the > then current released version of Emacs? Bad assumption. And what is the "current released version" - moving target/interpretation. I would advise against trying to guess compatibility like that. Let library authors determine and specify the compatibilities explicitly. Else assume nothing.