Arne Jørgensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Ralf Angeli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> Thanks. Caring for XEmacs-compatibility is actually a lot of fun. >> After writing a really nice and clean chunk of code working in Emacs >> you can be sure to have the opportunity to obfuscate it in all sorts >> of ways to make it work on XEmacs. (c; > > Ugly it is. > > XEmacs apparently has nothing close to `completing-read-multiple'. > Inspired by mh I have made a fallback to `multi-prompt'. > > It is ugly because when you have separated one option from another > with "," you cannot go back and edit the previous option. > > Ideally an `auctex-completing-read-multiple' should be implemented to > provide a compatibility layer to XEmacs.
That's not unheard of. Not uncommonly, we have something like (if (fboundp 'completing-read-multiple) (defalias 'TeX-completing-read-multiple 'completing-read-multiple) (defun TeX-completing-read-multiple [the definition stolen straight from Emacs] ... ) That way, once XEmacs catches up (at least if it catches up to the right version), its own definition gets used. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum _______________________________________________ auctex-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/auctex-devel
