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

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

Re: Spaces rather than tabs by a major mode hook


From: goncholden
Subject: Re: Spaces rather than tabs by a major mode hook
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2022 19:56:25 +0000


------- Original Message -------
On Saturday, June 11th, 2022 at 7:52 AM, goncholden <goncholden@protonmail.com> 
wrote:


> ------- Original Message -------
> On Saturday, June 11th, 2022 at 7:44 AM, Eli Zaretskii eliz@gnu.org wrote:
>
>
>
> > > Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2022 19:40:59 +0000
> > > From: goncholden goncholden@protonmail.com
> > > Cc: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
> > >
> > > ------- Original Message -------
> > > On Saturday, June 11th, 2022 at 7:33 AM, Eli Zaretskii eliz@gnu.org wrote:
> > >
> > > > > Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2022 18:10:15 +0000
> > > > > From: goncholden goncholden@protonmail.com
> > > > > Cc: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
> > > > >
> > > > > > > Have attached a file. When I press tab, the tab actually gets 
> > > > > > > removed
> > > > > > > and the code ends up in column 1. Strange things are happening 
> > > > > > > with tab.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In what line do you see this? And in which version of Emacs?
> > > > >
> > > > > I am using version 27.2
> > > > >
> > > > > For instance, it happens when I go to the beginning of each line in 
> > > > > the Arguments Section. Pressing TAB on the first column removed the 
> > > > > tab.
> > > >
> > > > Doesn't happen here with Emacs 27.2 invoked as "emacs -Q". Did you
> > > > try that in "emacs -Q"?
> > >
> > > With "emacs -Q" I can only introduce a single tab. If a tab already 
> > > exists, the cursor goes to the start of the first character.
> >
> > That's the intended and correct behavior of TAB in
> > programming-language modes. What is the problem with it?
>
>
> It is a problem because the authors of the code used multiple tab inserts for 
> indentation as well. This rejects the use of emacs outright.

Most likely written by some old dudes working in the late 80's and early 90's.  
Have a good hunch that they were old fortran programmers that did not entertain 
the idea of moving to Fortran 90.




reply via email to

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