Re: nnmail-split-fancy-match-partial-words

[Katsumi Yamaoka <yamaoka@jpl.org>]

>>>>> In <hd6c1v90.fsf@esemetz.metz.supelec.fr>
>>>>>	Fabrice Popineau wrote:

>     Reiner>  I'd rather not put such a special treatment into the code
>     Reiner>  _if_ we can avoid it.

> I agree: the list of special cases might become too long.

I agree too.

>     Reiner>  Or we could add a forth element specifying the
>     Reiner>  partial-words behavior in the split rule:

>     Reiner>  ("subject" ".*\\[ce\\].*" foo.ce t)

> I would like it, especially if the 4th element is optional.

>>>>> In <v9k6b8blyd.fsf@marauder.physik.uni-ulm.de>
>>>>>	Reiner Steib wrote:

> Sure, else it won't be backwards compatible.

That's a bright idea.  It will help people who have no choice
but to set `nnmail-split-fancy-match-partial-words' to t for all
split rules even though it is required for only a few special
cases.  Well, I'll do it in the near future if nobody stands.

> There are some bugs in the XEmacs 21.5 WRT syntax tables,IIRC.  See
> the following in dgnushack.el:

[...]

Though I don't know why the bug is being left for a long time,
it might be helpful to have a copy of the dgnushack.el's code
which checks and redefines the `with-syntax-table' macro in your
init file.