Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!nrl-cmf!ukma!gatech!bloom-beacon!mgm.mit.edu!wolfgang
From: wolfgang@mgm.mit.edu (Wolfgang Rupprecht)
Newsgroups: comp.emacs
Subject: Re: Is there a cleaner way to check for a narrowed buffer?
Message-ID: <2340@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU>
Date: 18 Jan 88 06:07:25 GMT
References: <138@axcess.UUCP> <2336@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> <5959@sol.ARPA>
Sender: daemon@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU
Reply-To: wolfgang@mgm.mit.edu (Wolfgang Rupprecht)
Organization: Freelance Software Consultant, Cambridge, Ma.
Lines: 30

%$#* news software wouldn't let me cancel my article.  

No checking for point-min + point-max isn't enough to tell if a buffer
is narrowed.  The only real way is probably to add some C code.

This might just do the trick. To editfns.c add:

DEFUN ("narrowp", Fnarrowp, Snarrowp, 0, 0, "",
  "Returns t if buffer is narrowed, else returns nil.")
  ()
{
     return (bf_head_clip > 1 || bf_tail_clip > 0) ? Qt: Qnil;
}

Towards the end of the file, add this extra line to syms_of_editfns:

void
syms_of_editfns ()
{
     [...]
     defsubr (&SNarrowp);		/* add this line only ! */
}

Now recompile + dump. 

(Now to see why nntp-rn screws up and refuses to let me cancel my
previous article.)
---
Wolfgang Rupprecht 	ARPA: wolfgang@mgm.mit.edu (IP 18.82.0.114)
Independent Consultant  UUCP: {mit-eddie!mgm.mit.edu,mirror!mit-mgm}!wolfgang 
			VOICE: Hey_Wolfgang!_(617)_267-4365