|
| From: | Dmitry Gutov |
| Subject: | bug#9300: 24.0.50; `bounds-of-thing-at-point' does not return nil when just after THING |
| Date: | Mon, 20 Jun 2016 15:53:42 +0300 |
| User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2 |
On 06/20/2016 12:21 PM, Tino Calancha wrote:
* I agree with Drew that there is neither sexp nor list at point, so i would expect I), II), III) and IV) returning nil.
It's a matter of definition. If we say there is, then there is. We could also add a variable, of course.
* I) and II) agree
Do they?
but III) and IV disagree. I would expect III) and IV) returning the same value.
Agree. But will you be satisfied if they both return "(foo bar)"?
| [Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |