foo
---
ba
to
foo
---
bar
which to my knowledge neither font-lock nor jit-lock can handle.
I'm tempted to say no, that should work just fine. But really, it all
depends on many more details of how foo and bar relate.
When
foo
---
ba
is fontified you have two choices: (a) Don't set a
jit-lock breaks font-lock's handling of syntax-table properties anyway.
Having syntactic properties behave correctly only for positions
preceding `font-lock-syntactically-fontified' means that I can't parse
text after that position reliably with
In emacs-unicode-2 branch, these files had been removed from
the lisp/international/ directory:
utf-8.el
latin-1.el
latin-2.el
latin-3.el
latin-4.el
latin-5.el
latin-8.el
latin-9.el
But their names still appear in lib-src/makefile.w32-in, when
emacs-unicode-2 branch is compiled on Windows
On Thu, Oct 13 2005, Boris B. Samorodov wrote:
[ On emacs-pretest. Cc-ing Ding ]
Symptoms:
I do have a letter with the next Subject:
-
Subject:
=?UTF-8?B?W2lwdC5ydSAjMTYzXSDQkNCy0YLQvtCe0YLQstC10YI6INCc0KHQmjog0KHQ?=
=?UTF-8?B?nyDRgtC10YHRgg==?=
-
In command-line mode I can
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Reiner Steib [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
But, as we need non-trivial change to the current code to make that
work in general, I think we must wait for Emacs 23.
If it works correctly for Latin-1 and Latin-9, I'd strongly suggest to
add it to the trunk. Not
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Zhang Wei [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In emacs-unicode-2 branch, these files had been removed from
the lisp/international/ directory:
utf-8.el
latin-1.el
latin-2.el
latin-3.el
latin-4.el
latin-5.el
latin-8.el
latin-9.el
But their names still appear in
On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 23:22:58 +0100, David Reitter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
Copying a region with a number to the clipboard means that some
additional characters seem to be copied.
That's BOM (Byte Order Mark) for UTF-16. Could you try the following
patch?
Then I'm confused. As Juri said (and it works):
`unspecified' does just what it says, i.e. leaves the default frame
value untouched. If you want to change the default for new frames,
you can set the value of this attribute to nil. So this should work
just
Then I'm confused. As Juri said (and it works):
`unspecified' does just what it says, i.e. leaves the default frame
value untouched. If you want to change the default for new frames,
you can set the value of this attribute to nil. So this should work
just
