Re: Suggestions? Better filetype sniffing -- XHTML vs. HTML

[Thien-Thi Nguyen <ttn@glug.org>]

don provan <dprovan@comcast.net> writes:

> It's hard to remember back that far, but I think I probably found that
> comparison helpful way back when. I'm not sure why you think it's such
> a stretch. Sure, there are significant differences, but none-the-less,
>
>     (setq f 'function)
>     (funcall f)
>
> is how you accomplish in emacs the same feat as in C with
>
>     f = function;   /* implicitely takes the address of function */
>     (*f)();
>
> I suppose not all C programmers are familiar with function pointers,
> yet you really aren't an emacs programmer until you're familiar with
> quoted function names, so it might be considered a stretch in the
> sense that some C programmers wouldn't have the concept to begin with.
> Is that what you meant?

adopting analogies is a great way to learn, but i have been burned by
adopting ones that i mistakenly took to be more insightful (general)
than they actually were.  in this case, i might have as a newbie
(conjecture because i have forgotten the precise steps of my learning
process, unfortunately), taken the above to also imply that:

  (setq f '(+ 1 2 3))
  (funcall f)

would also be "valid", which it is not.  it certainly is valid when the
quoted object is a function, i'm not arguing against that.  i'm just
pointing out how easily i confuse myself w/ a little imprecision.

thi