[Top][All Lists]

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

bug#38415: closed (f90.el matching END statements)

From: GNU bug Tracking System
Subject: bug#38415: closed (f90.el matching END statements)
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2020 02:56:01 +0000

Your message dated Wed, 15 Jan 2020 21:55:07 -0500
with message-id <address@hidden>
and subject line Re: bug#38415: f90.el matching END statements
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #38415,
regarding f90.el matching END statements
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact

38415: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=38415
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact address@hidden with problems
--- Begin Message --- Subject: f90.el matching END statements Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2019 10:08:17 +0000
Dear All,
I have recently run into an issue with f90.el, version 26.2
distributed with fedora 30.
The issue is with the autocompletion feature; Fortran 2008 has
introduced submodules; among the changes entailed by this, it is now
possible to have a piece of code like the following:
    module subroutine foo(bar)
      integer  :: bar
    end subroutine foo
  end interface
Now, if I hit TAB on the first "end" the autocompletion feature tries to insert
   end module subroutine
which is wrong, whereas I would like to insert
   end subroutine foo

I have found a fix for this. I changed file f90.el:1385-1386  from
   ((and (not (looking-at "module[ \t]*procedure\\_>"))
         (looking-at "\\(module\\)[ \t]+\\(\\(?:\\sw\\|\\s_\\)+\\)\\_>"))
   ((and (not (or
           (looking-at "module[ \t]*procedure\\_>")
           (looking-at "module[ \t]*subroutine\\_>")))
         (looking-at "\\(module\\)[ \t]+\\(\\(?:\\sw\\|\\s_\\)+\\)\\_>"))
and I got the desired behaviour.
It is quite possible that somebody on this list will have a better
solution, but this does the job.

Hope this helps
Salvatore Filippone

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- Subject: Re: bug#38415: f90.el matching END statements Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2020 21:55:07 -0500 User-agent: Gnus (www.gnus.org), GNU Emacs (www.gnu.org/software/emacs/)
Version: 27.1

Thanks for the report. I think this fixes it:

commit 3b0d1a5
Date:   Wed Jan 15 18:47:51 2020 -0800

    f90: handle F2008 module function
    * lisp/progmodes/f90.el (f90-font-lock-keywords-1)
    Handle F2008 "module function" and subroutine.  (Bug#38415)
    * test/lisp/progmodes/f90-tests.el (f90-test-bug38415): New test.

diff --git a/lisp/progmodes/f90.el b/lisp/progmodes/f90.el
index 92fba1c..9f61b8a 100644
--- a/lisp/progmodes/f90.el
+++ b/lisp/progmodes/f90.el
@@ -539,8 +539,10 @@ f90-font-lock-keywords-1
 read\\|write\\)\\)[ \t]*(" (1 font-lock-keyword-face t))
    ;; Other functions and declarations.  Named interfaces = F2003.
    ;; F2008: end submodule submodule_name.
-   '("\\_<\\(\\(?:end[ \t]*\\)?\\(program\\|\\(?:sub\\)?module\\|\
+   ;; F2008: module function|subroutine NAME.
+   '("\\_<\\(\\(?:end[ \t]*\\)?\\(program\\|\
+\\(?:module[ \t]*\\)?\\(?:function\\|subroutine\\)\\|\
 \\_>[ \t]*\\(\\(?:\\sw\\|\\s_\\)+\\)?"
      (1 font-lock-keyword-face) (3 font-lock-function-name-face nil t))
    ;; F2008: submodule (parent_name) submodule_name.
@@ -1381,14 +1383,19 @@ f90-looking-at-program-block-start
    ((looking-at "\\(program\\)[ \t]+\\(\\(?:\\sw\\|\\s_\\)+\\)\\_>")
     (list (match-string 1) (match-string 2)))
-   ((and (not (looking-at "module[ \t]*procedure\\_>"))
+   ((and (not (looking-at "module[ 
          (looking-at "\\(module\\)[ \t]+\\(\\(?:\\sw\\|\\s_\\)+\\)\\_>"))
     (list (match-string 1) (match-string 2)))
    ((looking-at "\\(submodule\\)[ \t]*([^)\n]+)[ 
     (list (match-string 1) (match-string 2)))
-   ((and (not (looking-at "end[ \t]*\\(function\\|subroutine\\)"))
-         (looking-at "[^!'\"&\n]*\\(function\\|subroutine\\)[ \t]+\
+   ((and (not (looking-at "end[ \t]*\\(function\\|procedure\\|subroutine\\)"))
+         (looking-at "[^!'\"&\n]*\\(?:module[ \t]*\\)?\
+\\(function\\|subroutine\\)[ \t]+\
+    ;; TODO: In F2008  "module procedure foo" may or may not start a block,
+    ;; It is impossible to tell the difference without parsing state.
+;;;         (looking-at "[^!'\"&\n]*module[ \t]*\\(procedure\\)[ \t]+\
     (list (match-string 1) (match-string 2)))))
 ;; Following will match an un-named main program block; however
 ;; one needs to check if there is an actual PROGRAM statement after
diff --git a/test/lisp/progmodes/f90-tests.el b/test/lisp/progmodes/f90-tests.el
index 540082c..b6fbac3 100644
--- a/test/lisp/progmodes/f90-tests.el
+++ b/test/lisp/progmodes/f90-tests.el
@@ -277,4 +277,24 @@ f90-test-indent
     (forward-line -2)
     (should (= 2 (current-indentation))))) ; type is
+(ert-deftest f90-test-bug38415 ()
+  "Test for https://debbugs.gnu.org/38415 ."
+  (with-temp-buffer
+    (f90-mode)
+    (setq-local f90-smart-end 'no-blink)
+    (insert "module function foo(x)
+real :: x
+    (f90-indent-line)
+    (should (equal " function foo"
+                   (buffer-substring (point) (line-end-position))))
+    (goto-char (point-max))
+    (insert "\nmodule subroutine bar(x)
+real :: x
+    (f90-indent-line)
+    (should (equal " subroutine bar"
+                   (buffer-substring (point) (line-end-position))))))
 ;;; f90-tests.el ends here

--- End Message ---

reply via email to

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