Re: Upcoming loss of usability of Emacs source files and Emacs.

[Andy Moreton]

On Tue 30 Jun 2015, Paul Eggert wrote:

> Dmitry Gutov wrote:
>>
>> The font-lock solution has other benefits; it could implement a different 
>> scheme
>> (or delegate the escaping step to substitute-command-keys, which seems a fine
>> idea now, actually). But it currently uses the syntax that's been requested: 
>> "\\~".
>
> I thought that font-lock couldn't use the same escape syntax that
> substitute-command-keys does, and that this was why you suggested \~ rather
> than \= -- i.e., so that one could use \= to escape characters that
> substitute-command-keys would otherwise interpret, and use \~ to escape
> characters that font-lock would otherwise interpret.
>
> It would be better to use the one escape syntax, as it's one less thing to
> explain to Emacs users.  But how would it work?  I don't see how.

To go off on a tangent slightly, is there a good reason why the
documentation is a string containing escapes rather than a sexp using
the normal quoting mechanisms ?

    AndyM