Re: [dev] quirks with sam's structured regexps

From: Raphaël Proust <raphlalou_AT_gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2016 07:59:41 +0000

On 28 February 2016 at 17:20, Greg Reagle <greg.reagle_AT_umbc.edu> wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 11:34:37AM +0000, Raphaël Proust wrote:
>> I managed to reconstruct an example that I am dissatisfied about.
>> The following works:
>> Edit ,x/test/{
>> i/<
>> a/>
>> }
>> But not the following:
>> Edit ,x/test/{
>> a/>
>> i/<
>> }
>> The second one you the result "<tes>t" and a warning about changes
>> being out of sequence.
>
> I get these results: The first version works fine. The second version
> shows error "?changes not in sequence" and does nothing.

There is a difference between acme's handling. It prints a warning but
also does some changes which are mangled.


>
> But I don't see a big problem here, only a minor inconvenience. Do your
> insert before your append when using a braced compound command, and it
> works fine.

Yes, it's a minor inconvenience only.
Received on Tue Mar 01 2016 - 08:59:41 CET