[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Problems with syntax-ppss: Was [... Apply `comment-depth' text prope

From: Alan Mackenzie
Subject: Re: Problems with syntax-ppss: Was [... Apply `comment-depth' text properties when calling `back_comment'.]
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 15:29:49 +0000
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)

Hello, Stefan.

On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 09:52:49AM -0500, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> > Well, given that syntax-ppss is not suitable for fixing back_comment,

> On the contrary I think it's perfectly suitable.

You're wrong.

I pointed out several reasons for this in two posts yesterday around
lunch time (European time).  You've failed to respond in detail to the
most serious points, beyond saying you haven't encountered them in your
testing (so far).

> >> > By the way, have you had a look at my patch, yet,
> >> Yes, and I didn't like it, hence this thread.
> > Is there anything you don't like about it besides the partial
> > duplication of the syntax-ppss functionality?  If so, what?

> Obviously, I prefer a separate data structure over text-properties, but
> that's just a mild preference.  The problem is in the duplication.

If syntax-ppss were to be amended to be rigorously correct, and hence
usable from back_comment, I would be delighted.

But while we have the prospect of infinite recursion, and the prospect
of the cache being useless (because point-min is inside a comment or
string), the prospects for using syntax-ppss in back_comment don't look

Can you fix these (and other) faults of syntax_ppss?

Pending such a fix, I take it you wouldn't object to me merging the
comment-cache branch with master?

>         Stefan

Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).

reply via email to

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