From xemacs-m  Thu Mar 13 07:50:36 1997
Received: from jagor.srce.hr (hniksic@jagor.srce.hr [161.53.2.130])
	by xemacs.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id HAA22577
	for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Thu, 13 Mar 1997 07:50:34 -0600 (CST)
Received: (from hniksic@localhost)
          by jagor.srce.hr (8.8.5/8.8.4)
	  id OAA05824; Thu, 13 Mar 1997 14:50:27 +0100 (MET)
Sender: hniksic@public.srce.hr
To: xemacs-beta@xemacs.org
Subject: Re: fontlock XEmacs vs. Emacs
References: <m3sp1zvrlu.fsf@jens.metrix.de>
X-URL: ftp://gnjilux.cc.fer.hr/pub/unix/util/wget/
X-Attribution: Hrv
X-Face: &}4JQk=L;e.~x+|eo]#DGk@x3~ed!.~lZ}YQcYb7f[WL9L'Z*+OyA\nAEL1M(".[qvI#a2E
 6WYI5>>e7'@_)3Ol9p|Nn2wNa/;~06jL*B%tTcn/XvhAu7qeES0\|MF%$;sI#yn1+y"
From: Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic@srce.hr>
Date: 13 Mar 1997 14:50:26 +0100
In-Reply-To: Jens Lautenbacher's message of 13 Mar 1997 14:39:09 +0100
Message-ID: <kigybbrkijh.fsf@jagor.srce.hr>
Lines: 19
X-Mailer: Gnus v5.4.25/XEmacs 19.14

Jens Lautenbacher <jens@metrix.de> writes:

> Is there any reason why the font lock from Emacs seems to have "better"
> regexps?

I'm not sure it's as simple as that.  The issue certainly isn't
trivial, as it may seem.  I have tried to eval the Emacs 19.34
c-font-lock-keywords* directly (as they are setq-ed), and I get the
same behaviour as ever.  I am beginning to think that this is a case
of a silent regexp-matcher deficiency.

One of the problems with that code is that the regexps are very evil
and defininitely hard to read.  Has anyone else tried to solve this?

-- 
Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic@srce.hr> | Student at FER Zagreb, Croatia
--------------------------------+--------------------------------
Then...  his face does a complete change of expression.  It goes from
a "Vengeance is mine" expression, to a "What the fuck" blank look.

