Nick Smallbone <[email protected]> writes:

> Štěpán Němec <[email protected]> writes:
>> Is the `characterp' -> `integerp' change really necessary? On XEmacs,
>> (integerp ?\C-0) => nil, although the integer <--> character arithmetic
>> (`-', `logand') works the same as in GNU Emacs.
>
> On GNU Emacs it's the other way round: (characterp ?\C-0) => nil, but
> (integerp ?\C-0) => t. What if we changed it to use
> (or (characterp char) (integerp char)) instead?

Sounds good. Any reason not to do that, Vegard?

_______________________________________________
implementations-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/implementations-list

Reply via email to