[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: question about narrowed behavior of next-property-change et al.
From: |
Richard Stallman |
Subject: |
Re: question about narrowed behavior of next-property-change et al. |
Date: |
Sat, 25 Jan 2003 14:23:04 -0500 |
Since the suggested change would only effect narrowed buffers, and only
to make them act more like a normal non-narrowed buffer, I would think
that only code that explicitly uses narrowing is potentially a problem
(under the assumption that a narrowed buffer should usually appear to
lisp code as if it were a normal buffer containing only the narrowed
region).
This reasoning is plausible indeed, but I still think that whoever
changes this should also check the callers one buy one.
- question about narrowed behavior of next-property-change et al., Miles Bader, 2003/01/23
- Re: question about narrowed behavior of next-property-change et al., Stefan Monnier, 2003/01/23
- Re: question about narrowed behavior of next-property-change et al., Richard Stallman, 2003/01/24
- Re: question about narrowed behavior of next-property-change et al., Miles Bader, 2003/01/24
- Re: question about narrowed behavior of next-property-change et al.,
Richard Stallman <=
- Re: question about narrowed behavior of next-property-change et al., Stefan Monnier, 2003/01/25
- Re: question about narrowed behavior of next-property-change et al., Richard Stallman, 2003/01/26
- Re: question about narrowed behavior of next-property-change et al., Stefan Monnier, 2003/01/27
- Re: question about narrowed behavior of next-property-change et al., Miles Bader, 2003/01/27
- Re: question about narrowed behavior of next-property-change et al., Richard Stallman, 2003/01/28