From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Bastien <bzg@altern.org>
Subject: Re: syntax table -- active dates
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2013 11:36:54 +0100
Message-ID: <87vc9tg5o2.fsf@bzg.ath.cx>
References: <CAJcAo8vpRmipY7vy_Z4PruK1M-Ew5pRL=U6pb9nS0m8Jp796Fw@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Return-path: <emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:46337)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <bastienguerry@gmail.com>) id 1U6JqQ-0008Qi-6c
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 15 Feb 2013 06:52:51 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <bastienguerry@gmail.com>) id 1U6JqK-0004uC-Eo
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 15 Feb 2013 06:52:46 -0500
Received: from mail-ee0-f46.google.com ([74.125.83.46]:42520)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <bastienguerry@gmail.com>) id 1U6JqK-0004u3-8n
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 15 Feb 2013 06:52:40 -0500
Received: by mail-ee0-f46.google.com with SMTP id e49so1811718eek.5
	for <emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>; Fri, 15 Feb 2013 03:52:39 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAJcAo8vpRmipY7vy_Z4PruK1M-Ew5pRL=U6pb9nS0m8Jp796Fw@mail.gmail.com>
	(Samuel Wales's message of "Tue, 12 Feb 2013 12:25:58 -0700")
List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." <emacs-orgmode.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: Samuel Wales <samologist@gmail.com>
Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org

Hi Samuel,

Samuel Wales <samologist@gmail.com> writes:

> Should the <> indicate sexp?  

Yes, this is the case now in master.  Also for {...} are sexps, 
which ease navigating through macros.

Thanks for suggesting this,

-- 
 Bastien