Hi Thorsten and Nicolas,
Nicolas Richard writes:
> It's almost certainly a typo, but it introduces no bug because '*' can't
> bear its special meaning after '^', so the regexp engine will make it
> match exactly the '*' character. But it'd be better written as "^*+"
> (but this is not recommende
Thorsten Jolitz writes:
> here is a possible regexp bug in org.el I discovered by accident:
>
> ,-
> | 7734: (and (not (looking-back "^\*+"))
> `-
It's almost certainly a typo, but it introduces no bug b
Hi List,
here is a possible regexp bug in org.el I discovered by accident:
,-
| 7734: (and (not (looking-back "^\*+"))
`-
#+begin_src emacs-lisp
(and (not (looking-back "^\*+")) ; missing backslash?
