Subject: Re: bug#9300: 24.0.50; `bounds-of-thing-at-point' does not return nil when just after THING

From: Eli Zaretskii <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2016 23:04:50 +0300

> Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2016 10:50:27 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Drew Adams <[email-masked]>
> Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]
> 
> > FWIW, I agree with Dmitry: this has been a de-facto behavior long
> > enough to consider it the correct one. If documentation is confusing
> > in that it says otherwise, we should fix the documentation.
> 
> I couldn't disagree more.
> 
> It is wrong to consider the current behavior "the correct one",
> regardless of how long it has been in place.  It is wrong because
> you cannot use it in a general and precise way.  It is just broken.
> It has been broken for a long time, but it is broken nevertheless.

That's immaterial.  It is being used in many places, and it's
obviously useful.

Somewhere in this long discussion there was a suggestion to add new
functions that behave like you want.  I suggest to invest energy in
that direction, instead of more bikeshedding.  That way, everyone is
happy, and you even get to prove you are right, if at some future
point in time we will find that most applications switched to the new
APIs.