From xemacs-m  Mon Sep 22 05:55:41 1997
Received: from frege.math.ethz.ch (root@frege-d-math-north-g-west.math.ethz.ch [129.132.145.3])
	by xemacs.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id FAA00972
	for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Mon, 22 Sep 1997 05:55:35 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from midget (vroonhof@midget [129.132.145.4]) by frege.math.ethz.ch (8.6.12/Main-STAT-mailer) with ESMTP id MAA29895 for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Mon, 22 Sep 1997 12:55:17 +0200
Received: (vroonhof@localhost) by midget (SMI-8.6/D-MATH-client) id MAA11443; Mon, 22 Sep 1997 12:55:16 +0200
To: xemacs-beta@xemacs.org
Subject: Re: `lazyshot': feature request
References: <87vhzyplc2.fsf@bittersweet.inetarena.com> <bysov1ogw4.fsf@midget.math.ethz.ch> <87k9gdb40s.fsf@bittersweet.inetarena.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.106)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
From: Jan Vroonhof <vroonhof@math.ethz.ch>
Date: 22 Sep 1997 12:55:16 +0200
In-Reply-To: karlheg@inetarena.com's message of 19 Sep 1997 10:35:31 -0700
Message-ID: <byen6hty7f.fsf@midget.math.ethz.ch>
Lines: 37
X-Mailer: Gnus v5.4.55/XEmacs 19.15

karlheg@inetarena.com (Karl M. Hegbloom) writes:

>     Jan> Why don't they just update the fontlocking information? This
>     Jan> seems pretty braindead to me.
> 
>  I think it's because the here documents and POD's need to be done
>  with a second pass, to cleanup the things highlighted within them
>  that shouldn't be.

So the font-locking of perl mode should be changed that this doens't
happen. What if I add new POD documents?

> 
>     Jan> How does this work with the lazy-lock v2 under FSF
>     Jan> Emacs. Does cperl-mode do some special hacking for that?
> 
>  No; the timing is different.  `lazy-shot' happens after the
>  find-pods-heres, and destroys what it did.

I don't understand why the timing is different. lazy-lock and
lazy-shot do basically the same thing only the trigger mechanism is
different. Somewhere there must be something that makes lazy-lock work
"correctly".

Where does cperl-mode put this hook?

>  Ok with me.  If I understand it well enough, I'll do that.  I expect
>  to take about six months to a year of solid study to really
>  understand XEmacs...  that's *after* I complete more foundation
>  studies.  I'll do what *I* can... and send it out for suggestions and
>  improvement.

That's the big thing about working with XEmacs you DON'T have to
understand to to help out. I for once don't understand it either, only
some small parts it.

Jan

