enami@ptgd.sony.co.jp (enami tsugutomo) (01/08/90)
In GNU Emacs 18.55.0 of Mon Dec 25 1989 on chihaya (berkeley-unix)
The function `char-after' returns non-sense value if its argument is a
marker.
Following patch will resume it, I hope.
enami.
RCS file: RCS/editfns.c,v
retrieving revision 1.1
diff -c -r1.1 editfns.c
*** /tmp/,RCSt1013312 Mon Jan 8 10:32:56 1990
--- editfns.c Mon Jan 8 10:32:14 1990
***************
*** 389,396 ****
Lisp_Object pos;
{
register Lisp_Object val;
! register int n = XINT (pos);
CHECK_NUMBER_COERCE_MARKER (pos, 0);
if (n < FirstCharacter || n > NumCharacters) return Qnil;
XFASTINT (val) = CharAt (n);
--- 389,399 ----
Lisp_Object pos;
{
register Lisp_Object val;
! register int n;
!
CHECK_NUMBER_COERCE_MARKER (pos, 0);
+
+ n = XINT (pos);
if (n < FirstCharacter || n > NumCharacters) return Qnil;
XFASTINT (val) = CharAt (n);shin@sgtp.apple.juice.or.jp (Shinichirou Sugou) (01/09/90)
Enami tsugutomo writes: In article <9001080141.AA13338@chihaya.ptgd.sony.co.jp> enami@ptgd.sony.co.jp (enami tsugutomo) writes: The function `char-after' returns non-sense value if its argument is a marker. According to Emacs-lisp manual, the function 'char-after' takes not marker but position type argument. (char-after (marker-position some-marker-value)) will work fine. CAUTION: (1) Reply-command in the mail system may NOT generate my address correctly. Please use the following address instead. shin%sgtp.apple.juice.or.jp@uunet.uu.net (2) I have no relation to Apple Computer Inc. :-) --- S.Sugou
kjones@talos.uu.net (Kyle Jones) (01/09/90)
Shinichirou Sugou writes: > According to Emacs-lisp manual, the function 'char-after' takes not marker > but position type argument. It is clear that the char-after function was meant to (and should) accept a marker as an argument; why else would CHECK_NUMBER_COERCE_MARKER have been used otherwise? The e-lisp manual needs to be corrected, along with the definition of char-after itself.
shin@sgtp.apple.juice.or.jp (Shinichirou Sugou) (01/12/90)
Kyle Jones wirtes:
It is clear that the char-after function was meant to (and should) accept a
marker as an argument; why else would CHECK_NUMBER_COERCE_MARKER have been
used otherwise?
Yes, you (and Mr.Enami) are right. I was wrong. I didn't check the source
program when I wrote that article, sorry.
CAUTION: (1) Reply-command in the mail system may NOT generate my address
correctly. Please use the following address instead.
shin%sgtp.apple.juice.or.jp@uunet.uu.net
(2) I have no relation to Apple Computer Inc. :-)
---
S.Sugou