[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: save-excursion again
From: |
Lennart Borgman |
Subject: |
Re: save-excursion again |
Date: |
Thu, 1 Jul 2010 03:54:09 +0200 |
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 2:30 AM, Stefan Monnier <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>> I took Stephen's point as saying that, if we have separate
>> save-current-buffer and save-region, with save-excursion strongly
>> discouraged, we would promote a clearer programming style.
>
> Probably. But then, for the same reasons, you'd also want to have
> save-point since save-region is so rarely needed.
So what is wrong with having those?
- Re: save-excursion again, (continued)
- Re: save-excursion again, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2010/06/19
- Re: save-excursion again, Lennart Borgman, 2010/06/19
- Re: save-excursion again, Lennart Borgman, 2010/06/19
- Re: save-excursion again, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2010/06/19
- Re: save-excursion again, Lennart Borgman, 2010/06/19
- Re: save-excursion again, Stefan Monnier, 2010/06/25
- Re: save-excursion again, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2010/06/25
- Re: save-excursion again, Stefan Monnier, 2010/06/30
- Re: save-excursion again, Uday S Reddy, 2010/06/26
- Re: save-excursion again, Stefan Monnier, 2010/06/30
- Re: save-excursion again,
Lennart Borgman <=
- Re: save-excursion again, Uday S Reddy, 2010/06/19
- Re: save-excursion again, Davis Herring, 2010/06/18