From 693473f0b33f8905d2ad5bc760eb621bb523cf1c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: David Aspinall Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 15:14:01 +0000 Subject: Removed blurry distinction between block-comment and comment in FSF's buffer-syntactic-context --- generic/proof-compat.el | 16 +++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) (limited to 'generic') diff --git a/generic/proof-compat.el b/generic/proof-compat.el index a7d4a8af..25c7ccfb 100644 --- a/generic/proof-compat.el +++ b/generic/proof-compat.el @@ -40,6 +40,16 @@ (autoload 'browse-url "browse-url" "Ask a WWW browser to load URL." t)) +;; Compatibility with XEmacs 20.3/4 +(or (boundp 'path-separator) + (setq path-separator (if proof-running-on-win32 ";" ":"))) +(or (fboundp 'split-path) + (defun split-path (path) + "Explode a search path into a list of strings. +The path components are separated with the characters specified +with `path-separator'." + (split-string path (regexp-quote path-separator)))) + ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; @@ -138,7 +148,11 @@ Otherwise treat \\ in NEWTEXT string as special: (let ((pp (parse-partial-sexp 1 (point)))) (cond ((nth 3 pp) 'string) - ((nth 7 pp) 'block-comment) + ;; ((nth 7 pp) 'block-comment) + ;; "Stefan Monnier" suggests + ;; distinguishing between block comments and ordinary comments + ;; is problematic: not what XEmacs claims and different to what + ;; (nth 7 pp) tells us in FSF Emacs. ((nth 4 pp) 'comment)))))) -- cgit v1.2.3