Hi Paul, "Paul D. Nelson" <[email protected]> writes:
> I have no experience with such macros, but the patch looks good to me, > save a trifling nitpick: > >> + ;; Asterisk or plus sign between arguments (sigh!): >> + ((and (memql spec '(?* ?+)) >> + (= (char-after) spec)) >> + (setq match-beg (point)) >> + (if (= (char-after) spec) > > This 'if' always fires, due to the second condition in the 'and' > guarding this branch of the 'cond' (or maybe you're just trying to > imitate the structure of the other branches). Thanks for your response. Indeed, that `if' will (always) return t, but I left it there for the (throw 'break nil) part. So if ever something goes wrong, the function still exits gracefully; that was my thinking. I will wait another day or two before installing that change. Best, Arash _______________________________________________ bug-auctex mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-auctex
