Re: Rationale for split-string?

[Bill Wohler]

"Stephen J. Turnbull" <address@hidden> writes:

> A few I couldn't tell at all without doing a much deeper analysis of
> the code than I have time for right now:
>
> ./lisp/calendar/todo-mode.el:869:  needs checking
> ./lisp/eshell/em-pred.el:601:  needs checking
> ./lisp/mh-e/mh-utils.el:1606:  needs checking

Thanks very much for checking. I believe that Satyaki has already fixed
this in CVS MH-E so that it would be compatible with present and future
versions of Emacs as well as XEmacs. Given our recent history, this
should find its way into CVS Emacs in a few weeks (in MH-E 7.4).

> ./lisp/mh-e/mh-alias.el:156:  want OMIT-NULLS t
> ./lisp/mh-e/mh-alias.el:289:  OK
> ./lisp/mh-e/mh-alias.el:469:  OK
> ./lisp/mh-e/mh-comp.el:374:  OK, double default
> ./lisp/mh-e/mh-e.el:2164:  OK, double default
> ./lisp/mh-e/mh-index.el:475:  OK, double default
> ./lisp/mh-e/mh-seq.el:966:  OK, double default
> ./lisp/mh-e/mh-utils.el:1606:  needs checking

--
Bill Wohler <address@hidden>  http://www.newt.com/wohler/  GnuPG ID:610BD9AD
Maintainer of comp.mail.mh FAQ and MH-E. Vote Libertarian!
If you're passed on the right, you're in the wrong lane.