Subject: bug#24542: 25.1.50; The symbol `@' and sexp scanning

From: Stefan Monnier <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 04 Sep 2020 10:22:41 -0400

>> Does anybody have any comments here?
> Stefan, any comments?

Checking for an immediately following word or symbol syntax doesn't see
sufficient if we consider cases like:

   '(sgasfg)

or

   , (sfgsdf)

or

   ,@ ;; entertained yet?
   \)

and then we have the really fun stuff like:

   (foo '@ bar)

vs

   (foo ,@ bar)

So maybe a better solution is a syntax-propertize rule which
distinguishes "@ after comma" from "@ not after comma"?

        Stefan