From xemacs-m  Wed Apr 30 18:58:38 1997
Received: from xemacs.cs.uiuc.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by xemacs.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id SAA14825;
	Wed, 30 Apr 1997 18:58:37 -0500 (CDT)
Message-Id: <199704302358.SAA14825@xemacs.org>
To: Steven L Baur <steve@miranova.com>
cc: xemacs-beta@xemacs.org
Subject: Re: Fixing C-g; zmacs-region woes 
In-reply-to: Your message of "30 Apr 1997 14:11:35 PDT."
             <m2hggoqkqg.fsf@altair.xemacs.org> 
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 18:58:35 -0500
From: Chuck Thompson <cthomp@xemacs.org>

    sb> RMS is quite persuasive on why the optional BUFFER arguments
    sb> are a Bad Idea.  They're a blight on the source code,
    sb> inconsistent in the face of needing to add further parameters,
    sb> and a needless inconsistency between XEmacs and Emacs.  When I
    sb> last checked, we may have had a call or two in 640,000 source
    sb> lines of Lisp that used it, but we might not have.  There's
    sb> also a lot of pain[1] involved in portably dealing with
    sb> functions that take a different number of parameters.

Try looking again.  There may not be that many places on the lisp side
but the C side sure as hell is using those extra args.  Ben and I
added them to get rid of that piece of dogshit known as current-buffer
which may work ok on the Lisp side but caused us both all kinds of
headaches on the C side.  You've been warned.


			-Chuck

