[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Testing new abbrev tables in elisp
From: |
Andreas Röhler |
Subject: |
Re: Testing new abbrev tables in elisp |
Date: |
Sun, 4 Nov 2007 22:06:52 +0100 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.9.5 |
Am Sonntag, 4. November 2007 03:42 schrieb Stephen J. Turnbull:
> Richard Stallman writes:
> > In fact (Richard, would you please confirm?) it may be a good idea
> > to use the Lisp implementation as a base to avoid legal issues if it
> > looks "too much like" XEmacs code (the problem is that AFAIK you have
> > looked at the XEmacs code, so couldn't swear that it's not an
> > unintentional copy of someone else's code).
> >
> > That is valid in general, but is it an issue here? Our old C code was
> > written by me, mostly.
>
> Well, of course any code in Emacs has all the necessary papers.
>
> But as I understand it, Andreas wants to code in C so he can borrow
> techniques he saw in the XEmacs code. It's fairly likely that code
> varies significantly from your code.
>
The head of abbrev.c shows remarks concerning authors
and displays GPL, everything looks fine for me. Maybe
exists a precise reason not to use that code for GNU Emacs?
XEmacs don't rely on single word abbrevs to be
expanded, but takes several words too. That's of
interest with NLP/translations and it's coded in C.
As it's at stake to look back or forward, speed
difference between Lisp and C execution might be
significant. At least that idea was in my head...
Thanks all
Andreas Röhler