Stefan Monnier wrote: > Could you give us more info about what you're trying to do. Maybe > there's a better way.
There certainly is a better way, suggested on gnu.emacs.sources several years ago by Dave Love, but I haven't had the time to properly generalize it. What I'd like to do right now is help someone using my legacy code, with a patch to work around this problem.
You are also correct, that this after-change-function implements a minor mode, and that I'm hoping for a general solution like Richard proposed (vs. advising every filter function as Kim proposed). It just seems to me that the command loop info variables and functions ought to return distinctly different values forms are evaluated outside of that context.
-- Kevin Rodgers
_______________________________________________ Emacs-devel mailing list Emacs-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel
