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: defcustom: order matters in `choice' with value-to-internal Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 21:23:00 -0400 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1206321797 17604 80.91.229.12 (24 Mar 2008 01:23:17 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 01:23:17 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Andreas Schwab Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Mar 24 02:23:47 2008 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 1JdbPc-0005NM-Kk for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 24 Mar 2008 02:23:45 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JdbP1-0001dF-Ds for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 23 Mar 2008 21:23:07 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JdbOx-0001d7-8e for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 23 Mar 2008 21:23:03 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JdbOv-0001ch-Mf for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 23 Mar 2008 21:23:02 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JdbOv-0001ce-H4 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 23 Mar 2008 21:23:01 -0400 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.pppoe.ca ([206.248.154.182] helo=ironport2-out.teksavvy.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JdbOv-0004i6-9h for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 23 Mar 2008 21:23:01 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhUHAI+f5kdMCrTo/2dsb2JhbACBW6Q/ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,544,1199682000"; d="scan'208";a="16444871" Original-Received: from smtp.pppoe.ca (HELO smtp.teksavvy.com) ([65.39.196.238]) by ironport2-out.teksavvy.com with ESMTP; 23 Mar 2008 21:23:00 -0400 Original-Received: from pastel.home ([76.10.180.232]) by smtp.teksavvy.com (Internet Mail Server v1.0) with ESMTP id EEV90600; Sun, 23 Mar 2008 21:23:00 -0400 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 893017F18; Sun, 23 Mar 2008 21:23:00 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Reiner Steib's message of "Sun, 23 Mar 2008 22:41:08 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.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:93282 Archived-At: >>> Order generally matters, the first matching choice is used. There is >>> nothing else that favors the repeat over regexp. >> >> But AFAICT the only difference between the two is the order between >> (const nil ..) and (repeat ...): the ordering between `repeat' and >> `regexp' is the same in both cases, so it still looks odd. > No, the order of `repeat regexp' and `regexp' is different: Duh! Sorry! Victim of my auto-unwrap hack, which hid the `regexp' entry at the end of the (const ...) lines Stefan