bug-gnu-emacs
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

bug#21072: 24.5; inconsistent behaviour of `C-M-h (mark-defun)' in Emacs


From: Andreas Röhler
Subject: bug#21072: 24.5; inconsistent behaviour of `C-M-h (mark-defun)' in Emacs Lisp
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 11:05:39 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/45.1.0



On 21.06.2016 09:58, Marcin Borkowski wrote:
On 2016-06-09, at 13:56, Marcin Borkowski <mbork@mbork.pl> wrote:

2b. Write a few tests for `mark-defun',_then_ fix the problem, and check
whether these tests pass.  Of course, all these tests would be for Elisp
(and maybe for C and/or JavaScript).
Hi all,

it seems nobody cared enough to answer my question, so I made the choice
of doing the Right Thing™, and started from developing some tests for
mark-defun.  Here's what I've got now.

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
;;; elisp-mode-tests.el --- Tests for emacs-lisp-mode  -*- lexical-binding: t; 
-*-

;; Copyright (C) 2015-2016 Free Software Foundation, Inc.

;; Author: Marcin Borkowski <mbork@mbork.pl>
;; Author: Dmitry Gutov <dgutov@yandex.ru>
;; Author: Stephen Leake <stephen_leake@member.fsf.org>

;; This file is part of GNU Emacs.

;; GNU Emacs is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify
;; it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
;; the Free Software Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or
;; (at your option) any later version.

;; GNU Emacs is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
;; but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
;; MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
;; GNU General Public License for more details.

;; You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
;; along with GNU Emacs.  If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.

;;; Code:

(require 'ert)


;;; Helpers

;; Copied and modified from `python-tests-with-temp-buffer'
(defmacro elisp-tests-with-temp-buffer (contents &rest body)
   "Create a `emacs-lisp-mode' enabled temp buffer with CONTENTS.
BODY is code to be executed within the temp buffer.  Point is
always located at the beginning of buffer."
   (declare (indent 1) (debug t))
   `(with-temp-buffer
      (emacs-lisp-mode)
      (insert ,contents)
      (goto-char (point-min))
      ,@body))

(defmacro conditional-save-excursion (arg &rest body)
   "Wrap BODY in `save-excursion', but only if ARG is non-nil."
  (declare (indent 1) (debug t))
   `(if ,arg
        (save-excursion ,@body)
      ,@body))

(defun look-at (string &optional count restore-point)
   "Move the point to the beginning of STRING in current buffer.
Return the new point value.  If COUNT is non-nil, move to COUNTth
occurrence.  If RESTORE-POINT is non-nil, return the found
position, but do not move point."
   (conditional-save-excursion restore-point
     (setq count (or count 1))
     (when (search-forward string nil t count)
       (goto-char (match-beginning 0)))
     (point)))


;;; Mark

(ert-deftest mark-defun-1 ()
   "Test `mark-defun' with point inside the defun."
   (elisp-tests-with-temp-buffer
    "
\(defun func-a ()
   \"A parameterless function.\"
   (ignore))

;; A comment right before a defun.
\(defun func-b (argument)
   \"A function with one ARGUMENT.\"
   (ignore argument)
   (message \"%s\" \"Argument ignored.\"))

\(defmacro macro-a (&rest body)
   \"A macro with BODY.\"
   `(,@body))
"
    (let ((expected-mark-beginning-position-1-2
           (progn
             (look-at "(defun func-a ")
             (previous-line 1)
             (point)))
          (expected-mark-end-position-1
           (save-excursion
             (look-at "(ignore))")
             (next-line 1)
             (point)))
          (expected-mark-end-position-2
           (save-excursion
             (point)
             (look-at "\"))")
             (next-line 1)
             (point)))
          (expected-mark-beginning-position-3
           (progn
             (look-at "(defmacro macro-a ")
             (previous-line 1)
             (point)))
          (expected-mark-end-position-3
           (progn
             (look-at "(,@body)")
             (next-line 1)
             (point))))
      ;; select the first defun
      (goto-char (point-min))
      (look-at "A parameterless function.")
      (mark-defun)
      (should (= (point) expected-mark-beginning-position-1-2))
      (should (= (marker-position (mark-marker))
                 expected-mark-end-position-1))
      ;; expand to the second defun
      (mark-defun 1)
      (should (= (point) expected-mark-beginning-position-1-2))
      (should (= (marker-position (mark-marker))
                 expected-mark-end-position-2))
      ;; select the macro
      (look-at "A macro")
      (mark-defun)
      (should (= (point) expected-mark-beginning-position-3))
      (should (= (marker-position (mark-marker))
                 expected-mark-end-position-3)))))

(ert-deftest mark-defun-2 ()
   "Test `mark-defun' with point between defuns."
   (elisp-tests-with-temp-buffer
       "
\(defun func-a ()
   \"A parameterless function.\"
   (ignore))

;; A comment right before a defun.
\(defun func-b (argument)
   \"A function with one ARGUMENT.\"
   (ignore argument)
   (message \"%s\" \"Argument ignored.\"))

\(defmacro macro-a (&rest body)
   \"A macro with BODY.\"
   `(,@body))
"
     (let ((expected-mark-beginning-position-1
            (progn
              (look-at "(defun func-b ")
              (point)))
           (expected-mark-end-position-1
            (save-excursion
              (look-at "ignored.\"))")
              (next-line 1)
              (point))))
       ;; select the first defun
       (goto-char expected-mark-end-position-1)
       (previous-line 1)
       (mark-defun)
       (should (= (point) expected-mark-beginning-position-1))
       (should (= (marker-position (mark-marker))
                  expected-mark-end-position-1)))))

(provide 'elisp-mode-tests)
;;; elisp-mode-tests.el ends here
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

These two tests pass now.  The next thing would be to change them to
what /should/ pass.  Before that, though, let me ask: what are your
opinion on these simple tests?  Are they enough?  Would you add
something?

Best,


Hi Marcin,

should no one else respond for now: please come back after release.
AFAIU the current implemention of beginning-of-defun prevents a consistent setup of related commands. A change here would include resp. require a major change...

Don't give up :)

Andreas





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]