Hey James, 

Thank you for being so thorough and detailed. 

I now understand now how it looks different, even
though when I look at the actual source code file it
looked consistent to me!

I really appreciate the pointer on emacs! This will
help me alot. Super constructive! So I guess darcs
treats tabs/spaces different on purpose so it looks
non-lined up when the "style" changes! Neat! And here,
when I first saw this phenomena, I thought it was a

I'll get right on fixing my patch, so it is more
consistent, and also to fixing my emacs so I can see
the style changes without having to depend on darcs. 
I'll also know when it looks different in darcs, it is
referring to spaces/indent changes...

About, the one space I added:  I actually added that
in on purpose. I like to add blank spaces around
certain code. Sort of a pause. As I am a bit dislexic,
 I depend on the blank spaces way more than I do the

I've never written code for someone else to see
before. So this is an experience in of in itself. 

I'll get on fixing the patch for better readability
and consistency. Please don't apply patch, so that I
can send another one that is more consistent. 



--- James Cameron <quozl at us.netrek.org> wrote:
> Regardless of what is better, you must follow the
> style in the file you
> are editing.

> That's easy to fix.  Customise your emacs.  For
> instance, have a look at
> these methods on the Emacs Wiki ...
> http://www.emacswiki.org/cgi-bin/wiki/ShowWhiteSpace
> Especially note the "Show Tabs Using a Face (Color)"
> section, which I've
> just tried on my emacs and it works great.  If you
> try this, make sure
> you add a hook section for c-mode.

Again, thanks for this tip. I'm going to try it out. 

> It doesn't line up, when the patch is displayed ...
> therefore I presume
> you didn't review the patch bands yourself.  Be
> honest ... did you?

I only looked at it when your e-mail popped out saying
it wasn't consistent ;-P. 
> Check every line of a patch you are proposing.  It
> shouldn't be
> difficult, and it's a great way to spot problems.

I'll look at the patch file too, in addition to the
original source code.

> Priority: high.
> Problem: the patch name doesn't meet the STYLE
> requirements, in that it
> is not in user-visible NEWS style.  See "Darcs -
> Patch Name and Long
> Comment" in the STYLE file.

Okay, I'm not sure what this means. But I'll read the
STYLE file and figure it out. 

I'll also keep to make sure the function names are
mentioned in the files modifiles.