Re: Raw string literals in Emacs lisp.

[David Kastrup]

"Stephen J. Turnbull" <address@hidden> writes:

> I'm not really worried about more complex.  I am concerned about
> whether there's an unambiguous answer to "what is the value -- or
> error -- of eval-print-last-sexp at point?"
>
> In the case of
>
>     (format "%s%c\n""r#"?\")-!-
>
> it's "r#\"\n".  But for
>
>     (format "%s%c\n""r#"?\"-!-)
>
> you could argue that it's ?\" (that's XEmacs's opinion) or "?\\".  I
> guess for XEmacs (which already has this syntax in the wild) the rule
> should be "longest match wins" (because otherwise there's no way to
> evaluate r#"?\" in an interactive buffer), but for Emacs that looks
> like a deal-killer, and it's already present with just r#"?\".

I don't understand the reason why this should be a deal-killer for Emacs
but not for XEmacs.  Is this because of different syntax infrastructure?
Or a different tolerance level for conveivable but unlikely problems?
Is XEmacs going to run into the same problems when ingesting some of
Emacs' highlighting/parsing stuff?

-- 
David Kastrup