Re: antlr-mode.el - need some support by python.el

[Dmitry Gutov]

On 03/04/2015 06:53 PM, Wedler, Christoph wrote:

> I just remember the following: if we would introduce a
> prog-indent-calculate-function, we could as well pass that value as
> argument to that function (with a benefit that the value will be more
> likely be respected).

That's a considerable benefit, IMO.

> But this would not be enough: we need to do something similar to
> `indent-region-function', i.e. the different indent region functions
> should also respect LEFTMOST-COL.

IME, most of the time that variable's value is nil. But of course, we 
could pass an extra argument to it too (and fall back to the current 
calling convention if the call signals `wrong-number-of-arguments'.

> In my opinion, this would only worth the trouble if we can get
> completely rid of `prog-indentation-context'.

Yes, probably.

> If we do the START/END boundaries via narrowing, we probably
> induce too much work in major modes.  As I wrote earlier: all
> functions which are called by the indent calculation must not call widen
> anymore

How is it "too much work"? I've written my share of indentation code, 
and the only related function that I found useful were 
`save-restriction' and `narrow-to-region'.