Re: "Use font-lock-support-mode rather than calling lazy-lock-mode"

[ishikawa]

Hi,


Stefan Monnier wrote:
> > What would people think of making font-lock-support-mode a no-op, and
> > creating some new variable people can use if they really want to use
> > something else instead of jit-lock?
>
> They'd think "Damn, Richard!  What got into you?".
> Seriously, I think we're wasting our time here: this problem does not
> impact functionality.
> AFAICT the OP's problem was the use of a separate package which enabled
> lazy-lock.  That package is hence (minorl) broken and will be fixed soon
> enough when people start reporting the problem.
>
>
>         Stefan

The original reporter is here again. I agree.
Once enough people start to complain, the various widely used packages (and 
their methods of customization) would be fixed sooner or later.
I would rather have it sooner and thus a pointer to such changes would be
nice because having such material on-line, the package maintainers will fix such 
problems in a short time.
The information doesn't have to be in the manual page. A wiki or web page
accessible for such would-be trial users, among whom are package developers,
are just fine.

TIA.

Happy Hacking,
Chiaki Ishikawa