From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: next emacs version? Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2010 15:10:47 -0400 Message-ID: References: <56D10E2523764AC98D99CEBC55DBAD93@us.oracle.com> <83iq8sigyq.fsf@gnu.org> <83d3z0i3nu.fsf@gnu.org> <911BA1D06CEB4306924D0069BA2D3DFF@us.oracle.com> <83bpeki18a.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1269112286 24203 80.91.229.12 (20 Mar 2010 19:11:26 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2010 19:11:26 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 'Eli Zaretskii' , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Drew Adams" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Mar 20 20:11:21 2010 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 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Nt44v-0005kz-6S for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 20 Mar 2010 20:11:21 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38994 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Nt44u-00033z-LL for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 20 Mar 2010 15:11:20 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Nt44V-0002nB-BD for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 20 Mar 2010 15:10:55 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=42512 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Nt44T-0002mQ-QI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 20 Mar 2010 15:10:54 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Nt44S-0004zA-PC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 20 Mar 2010 15:10:53 -0400 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.183]:57125 helo=ironport2-out.pppoe.ca) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Nt44P-0004yj-8m; Sat, 20 Mar 2010 15:10:49 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvsEACq6pEtFpZMX/2dsb2JhbACbPHS8KYR9BIsd X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.51,279,1267419600"; d="scan'208";a="58670958" Original-Received: from 69-165-147-23.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO pastel.home) ([69.165.147.23]) by ironport2-out.pppoe.ca with ESMTP; 20 Mar 2010 15:10:48 -0400 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id E6BFA7FBC; Sat, 20 Mar 2010 15:10:47 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Drew Adams's message of "Fri, 19 Mar 2010 14:16:36 -0700") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. 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:122377 Archived-At: >> checking (string-match directory-listing-before-filename-regexp >> ) might work at least as well for >> the problem at hand. > Ugh. It could be done, but as I said earlier: >>> FWIW, the regexp in question, >>> `directory-listing-before-filename-regexp', is >>> among the hairiest I've come across (have a look >>> - quite amusing), and I don't think it's a good idea to >>> try to test against that value. The test I propose above is not to test the value of directory-listing-before-filename-regexp but its behavior. Basically: figure out the bug that the change was intended to fix, and then use the thing that triggered the bug as the string to pass to string-match (presumably the match will succeed in one case and fail in the other). Stefan