[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Changes to hi-lock before release.
From: |
Richard Stallman |
Subject: |
Re: Changes to hi-lock before release. |
Date: |
Sat, 21 Apr 2007 20:46:35 -0400 |
> Also, it seems absurd for an explicit call to hi-lock-find-patterns to
> check this variable. If the user explicitly gives the command, it
> should be obeyed. I think that hi-lock-file-patterns-policy should be
> tested only when hi-lock-find-patterns is called in other ways (such
> as by find-file).
What you suggested is indeed the behavior of hi-lock-find-patterns.
I don't see it. hi-lock-find-patterns takes no arguments
and it never bypasses checking hi-lock-file-patterns-policy.
How does it distinguish explicit M-x calls from calls that come from hooks?
We should fix this, but not before the release.
- Re: Changes to hi-lock before release., (continued)
Re: Changes to hi-lock before release., Richard Stallman, 2007/04/21
Re: Changes to hi-lock before release.,
Richard Stallman <=
Re: Changes to hi-lock before release., Chong Yidong, 2007/04/21
Re: Changes to hi-lock before release., Richard Stallman, 2007/04/22
Re: Changes to hi-lock before release., Chong Yidong, 2007/04/23
Re: Changes to hi-lock before release., Alan Mackenzie, 2007/04/24