From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/19314 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: multipart/related test Date: 30 Nov 1998 02:47:24 +0100 Sender: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035157687 10983 80.91.224.250 (20 Oct 2002 23:48:07 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 23:48:07 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: Original-Received: from karazm.math.uh.edu (karazm.math.uh.edu [129.7.128.1]) by sclp3.sclp.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id VAA03220 for ; Sun, 29 Nov 1998 21:11:08 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu (Sina.HPC.UH.EDU [129.7.3.5]) by karazm.math.uh.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id UAB22368; Sun, 29 Nov 1998 20:05:31 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Sun, 29 Nov 1998 20:05:15 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from sclp3.sclp.com (root@sclp3.sclp.com [204.252.123.139]) by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id UAA27211 for ; Sun, 29 Nov 1998 20:05:06 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from sparky.gnus.org (ppp091.uio.no [129.240.240.96]) by sclp3.sclp.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id VAA03024 for ; Sun, 29 Nov 1998 21:04:57 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: (from larsi@localhost) by sparky.gnus.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id DAA03378; Mon, 30 Nov 1998 03:16:09 +0100 Mail-Copies-To: never X-Now-Reading: Greg Bear's _Slant_ X-Now-Playing: Various's _The Fruit of the Original Sin_ Original-To: ding@gnus.org In-Reply-To: Hrvoje Niksic's message of "30 Nov 1998 01:42:39 +0100" User-Agent: Gnus/5.070057 (Pterodactyl Gnus v0.57) XEmacs/21.2(beta3) (Aglaia) X-Face: &w!^oO~dS|}-P0~ge{$c!h\ writes: > As strange as it may sound, XEmacs has a user-base of its own, and > IMHO we cannot afford to change documented interfaces on Stallman's > whims, at least not in areas where XEmacs implemented stuff before FSF > Emacs. Well, this is my whim, and not Stallman's. :-) Here's how I think it happened: I was programming under XEmacs, and I wrote `(buffer-string some-buffer)'. I then switched to Emacs, and the thing bugged out, of course. (As it would have done under XEmacs, but I guess I never tried.) I grumbled and rewrote it as `(save-excursion (set-buffer some-buffer) (buffer-string))'. And then I sent a patch to Stallman to make Emacs XEmacs-compliant (as I, in a particularly dizzy moment, thought it to be), and he accepted it. I still do think that my dizzyness yielded a better function than the hard truth. `buffer-string' and `buffer-substring' have different feeling, and I think it makes sense to have them as separate functions. I mean -- you seldom want to give a buffer argument to `buffer-substring', but you often want to give it to `buffer-string', so having to write `(buffer-string nil nil some-buffer)' feels weird to me. -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) larsi@gnus.org * Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen