Re: save-excursion doesn't always work

[David Kastrup <David.Kastrup@t-online.de>]

"Stefan Monnier <foo@acm.com>" <monnier+gnu.emacs.help/news/@flint.cs.yale.edu> writes:

> >>>>> "David" == David Kastrup <David.Kastrup@t-online.de> writes:
> > Come off it.  Nobody uses M-q as a substitute for forward-paragraph on
> > filled text.  It is a text-changing command.  I don't think people
> > will complain much if it changes text.  They will complain if regions
> > and marks end up on the wrong side of (maybe adjusted) white space,
> > though.  _Regardless_ of whether there were indeed formatting changes
> > or not.
> 
> I have no clue what makes you think I disagree with you.
> I though I made it pretty clear that my comment was only an answer
> to your implicit question about whether Emacs' default filling code
> had solved that problem.

Interesting.  Since _I_ said that Emacs' filling mode worked
differently (and more cautious) with regard to this aspect than
AUCTeX's, and since you contributed no information whatsoever about
Emacs' fill-mode behavior with regard to original poster's question
about AUCTeX's fill-mode and my explanation, I find it an interesting
twist that you now claim _I_ asked an implicit question which _you_
claim to have answered.

Well, suit yourself.  In that case, thank you for your answer
(whatever it may have been) to my implicit question (whatever that may
have been).

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum