[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: ?\_ patch
From: |
Kenichi Handa |
Subject: |
Re: ?\_ patch |
Date: |
Thu, 6 Feb 2003 10:31:32 +0900 (JST) |
User-agent: |
SEMI/1.14.3 (Ushinoya) FLIM/1.14.2 (Yagi-Nishiguchi) APEL/10.2 Emacs/21.2.92 (sparc-sun-solaris2.6) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI) |
In article <address@hidden>, Luc Teirlinck <address@hidden> writes:
> I now lean toward the original solution of using ?\s.
I've just found that (eq 's '\s) => t.
But, as (eq 'e '\e) is also t, this is not a problem,
perhaps.
> Alternatives like using 32, ?\040 or ?\x20 do not look attractive.
To me the last two are attractive because we only have to
change a manual to promote them instead of "? " or "?\ ". :-)
---
Ken'ichi HANDA
address@hidden
- Re: ?\_ patch, (continued)
- Re: ?\_ patch, Andreas Schwab, 2003/02/10
- Re: ?\_ patch, Richard Stallman, 2003/02/07
- Re: ?\_ patch, Kim F. Storm, 2003/02/07
- Re: ?\_ patch, Andreas Schwab, 2003/02/07
- Re: ?\_ patch, Richard Stallman, 2003/02/10
- Re: ?\_ patch, Kim F. Storm, 2003/02/10
- Re: ?\_ patch, Richard Stallman, 2003/02/11
- Re: ?\_ patch, Kim F. Storm, 2003/02/12
- Re: ?\_ patch, Richard Stallman, 2003/02/13
- Re: ?\_ patch, Kim F. Storm, 2003/02/13
- Re: ?\_ patch,
Kenichi Handa <=
- Re: ?\_ patch, Andreas Schwab, 2003/02/06