Felix, Martin, can we *please* not debate this in SVN?
Felix: discuss first, make changes after!
> Modified: trunk/docutils/tools/editors/emacs/rst.el
> @@ -253,11 +253,23 @@
> (defvar rst-extra-paragraph-separate
> "\\|[ \t]*\\([-+*]\\|[0-9]+\\.\\) "
> "Extra parapraph-separate patterns to add for text-mode.")
> +;; FIXME: What about the missing>?
Answer: "message-mode" does the job better. (But having played with
it a bit, I find it may cause more problems than its worth.)
Read the log for revisions 4068 through 4073.
> +;; The author uses a hardcoded for paragraph-separate: "\f\\|>*[ \t]*$"
> (defun rst-set-paragraph-separation ()
> + "Sets the paragraph separation for restructuredtext."
> + ;; FIXME: the variable should be made automatically buffer local
Do you mean "make-variable-buffer-local"? From it's docs:
In most cases it is better to use `make-local-variable',
which makes a variable local in just one buffer.
> rather than
> + ;; using a function here, this function is unnecessary.
Which function do you mean, "rst-set-paragraph-separation" or
> (make-local-variable 'paragraph-start) ; prevent it growing every time
> (setq paragraph-start (concat paragraph-start rst-extra-paragraph-separate)))
> +;; FIXME: What about paragraph-separate? paragraph-start and paragraph-separate
> +;; are different.
Same answer: message-mode.
> The author hardcodes the value to
> +;; "\f\\|>*[ \t]*$\\|>*[ \t]*[-+*] \\|>*[ \t]*[0-9#]+\\. "
> +;; FIXME: the variables above are in limbo and need some fixing.
Agreed. They should not have been unilaterally changed in the first
David Goodger <http://python.net/~goodger>