From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: fortran-fill-paragraph fails Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2006 20:45:33 -0500 Message-ID: References: <87d56acfod.fsf@lrde.org> <17810.43383.385509.776556@tfkp07.physik.uni-erlangen.de> <87ejqhwnhu.fsf@lrde.org> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1167529642 22173 80.91.229.12 (31 Dec 2006 01:47:22 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2006 01:47:22 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, Roland.Winkler@physik.uni-erlangen.de Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Dec 31 02:47:21 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1H0pnC-0007ky-FX for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 31 Dec 2006 02:47:18 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1H0pnC-000539-18 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 30 Dec 2006 20:47:18 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1H0plq-0003yW-P1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 30 Dec 2006 20:45:54 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1H0plp-0003xb-SZ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 30 Dec 2006 20:45:53 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1H0plp-0003xN-IS for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 30 Dec 2006 20:45:53 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1H0plo-0000LJ-Pb for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 30 Dec 2006 20:45:52 -0500 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1H0plV-0004xK-Pl; Sat, 30 Dec 2006 20:45:33 -0500 Original-To: michael@cadilhac.name (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Micha=EBl?= Cadilhac) In-reply-to: <87ejqhwnhu.fsf@lrde.org> (michael@cadilhac.name) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:64540 Archived-At: Suppose commark is `C', we will have : (string-match "^C" (concat "\0" commark "a")) -> nil (string-match "C" (concat "\0" commark "a")) -> 1 (string-match "^ ?C" (concat "\0" commark "a")) -> nil Why are these results correct? What is the overall explanation for the job this code is trying to do? I find I can't understand these comments ;; `commark' is surrounded with arbitrary text (`\0' and `a') ;; to make sure it can be used as an optimization of ;; `comment-start-skip' in the middle of a line. For example, ;; `commark' can't be used with the "@c" in TeXinfo (hence ;; the `a') or with the "C" at BOL in Fortran (hence the `\0'). As far as I know, COMMARK (which is how it should be written) refers to some text copied out of the buffer. What does it mean to say whether that that text "can't be used with the `@c' in Texinfo"? Is there anyone that actually understands that comment and could rewrite it more clearly?