Re: Musings: Supposed places of safety, guaranteed by parse-partial-sexp are not safe.

[Stefan Monnier]

>>> If you change (nth 5 ppss) you would still have to say that (nth 4 ppss)
>>> is unreliable in this special case.
>> Not if (nth 5 ppss) says that the buffer position is the one *after* the
>> "/*" sequence.  Of course for "*/" we'd conversely want to use the state
>> *before* "*/".
> What I meant was that the caller would have to care about (nth 5 ppss)
> too, wherever she now looked only at (nth 3 ppss) and (nth 4 ppss).

That's what I understood and my suggestion does address this issue (tho
it means that (nth 5 ppss) will sometimes refer to a buffer position
after (point) and sometimes before).

A case that needs to work is "/*/" in C mode, for example.


        Stefan