[Top][All Lists]

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

bug#25517: 25.1.91; print-format specifier mistaken as comment

From: Andreas Röhler
Subject: bug#25517: 25.1.91; print-format specifier mistaken as comment
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 09:41:21 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/45.6.0

On 24.01.2017 23:49, address@hidden wrote:
Andreas Röhler <address@hidden> writes:

On 24.01.2017 16:41, Noam Postavsky wrote:
On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 10:35 AM, Andreas Röhler
<address@hidden> wrote:
@@ -165,7 +165,7 @@ octave-mode-syntax-table
-    (modify-syntax-entry ?\' "."  table)
+    (modify-syntax-entry ?\' "\""  table)
Thanks. That should be a useful cure in octave-mode.

A resp. fix seems needed in inferior-octave-mode-map.
Huh? What do you think needs changing in inferior-octave-mode-map?
That's a keymap? If you meant inferior-octave-mode-syntax-table, then
it already inherits everything from octave-mode-syntax-table anyway.

(defvar inferior-octave-mode-syntax-table
    (let ((table (make-syntax-table octave-mode-syntax-table)))
    "Syntax table in use in `inferior-octave-mode' buffers.")
Okay, see. However, it's not gone - see attachment.
While correct at octave-mode.
That's without the change though, right?

No, changed source according to your fix. Otherwise wouldn't expect it correct in plain octave-mode.

I found out why octave-mode-syntax-table misses this setting:
octave-mode uses a syntax-propertize-function to set the correct syntax
for quotes, it looks like that's needed because of the way backslashes
are handled.

It's not so easy to apply octave-syntax-propertize-function to
inferior-octave-mode to due prompts and output being in the buffer too.
Kind of a similar problem as the multiple mode stuff.

Isn't there good old syntax-ppss at work, the universal source of bugs?

What about employing (parse-partial-sexp (line-beginning-position) (point)) instead?
This would reduce the number of fontify-bugs considerably.
Starting from pos of last prompt should be possible too.

reply via email to

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