> On Oct 25, 2022, at 7:55 PM, Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> wrote:
> 
>> Presumably this makes us go to the next arg’h begining-of-defun, and goes to
>> the end of that defun. However, what if beginning-of-defun-raw couldn’t find
>> any defun beyond point, didn’t move point, and returned nil? At that point
>> calling end-of-defun-function breaks the assumption that we only call it
>> when point is at the beginning of a defun. Am I missing something?
> 
> No, you're quite right.  We should double check that
> `beginning-of-defun-raw` was successful (and do something else if not).

How about:

Yuan