From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Giorgos Keramidas Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: Is there any elisp functions to tell whether the cursor is in a comment block? Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2008 20:40:07 +0300 Organization: SunSITE.dk - Supporting Open source Message-ID: <87d4lcl894.fsf@kobe.laptop> 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> <002601c8e6c7$077ad530$0200a8c0@us.oracle.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1216399290 30748 80.91.229.12 (18 Jul 2008 16:41:30 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2008 16:41:30 +0000 (UTC) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jul 18 18:42:18 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 1KJt28-0008Iq-TG for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 18 Jul 2008 18:42:17 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59144 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KJt1G-0005Qk-15 for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 18 Jul 2008 12:41:22 -0400 Original-Path: news.stanford.edu!headwall.stanford.edu!newshub.sdsu.edu!zen.net.uk!dedekind.zen.co.uk!news.banetele.no!dotsrc.org!filter.dotsrc.org!news.dotsrc.org!not-for-mail Original-Newsgroups: gnu.emacs.help User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (berkeley-unix) Cancel-Lock: sha1:dBVSSqjzsKIxh1IKyI8c7kmcLqw= Original-Lines: 42 Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: 77.49.140.149 Original-X-Trace: news.sunsite.dk DXC=GA70<184>1Ma0CAcDd; B0AYSB=nbEKnkKl:4`YVO27`OL^MjGbH?lJH1TkjLA_[BD; [nkjJCb^b<@D; d>L Original-X-Complaints-To: staff@sunsite.dk Original-Xref: news.stanford.edu gnu.emacs.help:160356 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:55704 Archived-At: On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 00:19:26 +0200, "Lennart Borgman (gmail)" wrote: > Drew Adams wrote: >>> I would suggest a shorter version of the compatibility line, like >>> ;; Compatibility: Emacs=20.*,21.*,22.* XEmacs=unknown >> > ... >> 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. > > Sure. > >> `unknown' doesn't seem useful to me. But how should absence be interpreted, in >> general: as unknown or incompatible? > > Maybe > > ;; Compatible: Emacs=21.*,22.* > ;; Incompatible: Emacs=20.*, XEmacs > > And absence == unknown. That's probably a good idea. Something like the Debian dependency system, with tags like >= GNU Emacs 21.1 may also be nice. The FreeBSD ports have a ${CONFLICTS} makefile convention that may be useful too. The editors/emacs and editors/emacs-devel ports install files with the same name, so they include ${CONFLICTS} like this: CONFLICTS= emacs-19.* emacs-21.* emacs-22.* \ xemacs-[0-9]* xemacs-devel-[0-9]* \ xemacs-mule-[0-9]* xemacs-devel-mule-[0-9]* We could probably use something similar to mark up compatibility comments, i.e.: ;; Compatible: emacs-21.*, emacs-22.*, xemacs-21.3 ;; Incompatible: emacs-19.*, emacs-20.*, xemacs-21.4