[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#59662: 29.0.50; [PATCH] Add treesit--indent-defun
From: |
Yuan Fu |
Subject: |
bug#59662: 29.0.50; [PATCH] Add treesit--indent-defun |
Date: |
Wed, 7 Dec 2022 13:40:31 -0800 |
> On Dec 7, 2022, at 12:06 PM, Theodor Thornhill <theo@thornhill.no> wrote:
>
> Yuan Fu <casouri@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Theodor Thornhill <theo@thornhill.no> writes:
>>
>>> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>>>
>>>>> From: Theodor Thornhill <theo@thornhill.no>
>>>>> Cc: "Theodor Thornhill via Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife
>>>>> of text editors" <bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org>, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>,
>>>>> casouri@gmail.com, 59662@debbugs.gnu.org
>>>>> Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2022 13:33:35 +0100
>>>>>
>>>>> Theodor Thornhill <theo@thornhill.no> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2 December 2022 22:09:55 CET, "Daniel Martín" <mardani29@yahoo.es>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> Theodor Thornhill <theo@thornhill.no> writes:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Right - thanks. However, this makes me wonder - should we really be
>>>>>>>> setting mark here? I see that c-indent-defun does not, and it feels
>>>>>>>> weird that indenting adds to the mark ring. What do you think? My
>>>>>>>> first patch used
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> (indent-region
>>>>>>>> (treesit-node-start node)
>>>>>>>> (treesit-node-end node))
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Which behaves similarly to c-indent-defun.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> See attached patch.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't have a strong opinion, but if we can indent without setting the
>>>>>>> mark, I think it'd be a cleaner command. Specially if c-indent-defun
>>>>>>> doesn't set the mark either.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yeah, we don't need to set the mark. Thanks for the feedback :)
>>>>>> Theo
>>>>>
>>>>> Eli, do you have any opinion on this matter? Should we implement this
>>>>> function without using marks? That will make the function a smidge
>>>>> bigger, but would not mess up the mark-ring. I think that's desirable,
>>>>> at least.
>>>>
>>>> IMO, it is better not to set the mark, indeed.
>>>
>>> Agreed, see attached patch. What do you think, Yuan and Eli?
>>>
>>> Should we expose the internal helper I used, or maybe this function
>>> could just as well live in treesit.c?
>>>
>>> Theo
>>>
>>
>> Very nice, I applied this patch with some changes to the function. I
>> think using treesit-beginning/end-of-defun is more robust.
>>
>> Yuan
>
> Thanks! Would you mind describing why?
Yes, sorry. I’m planning to change treesit-beginning-of-defun and
treesit-end-of-defun so they can behave differently according to user
configuration, basically they can decide whether to skip nested defuns or not.
If we use these functions rather than re-implementing their logic (to some
extent) in c-ts-mode-indent-defun, any improvement to defun navigation would
automatically benefit c-ts-mode-indent-defun.
Yuan
- bug#59662: 29.0.50; [PATCH] Add treesit--indent-defun, (continued)
- bug#59662: 29.0.50; [PATCH] Add treesit--indent-defun, Dmitry Gutov, 2022/12/02
- bug#59662: 29.0.50; [PATCH] Add treesit--indent-defun, Theodor Thornhill, 2022/12/02
- bug#59662: 29.0.50; [PATCH] Add treesit--indent-defun, Dmitry Gutov, 2022/12/02
- bug#59662: 29.0.50; [PATCH] Add treesit--indent-defun, Eli Zaretskii, 2022/12/03
- bug#59662: 29.0.50; [PATCH] Add treesit--indent-defun, Dmitry Gutov, 2022/12/03
- bug#59662: 29.0.50; [PATCH] Add treesit--indent-defun, Eli Zaretskii, 2022/12/03
- bug#59662: 29.0.50; [PATCH] Add treesit--indent-defun, Dmitry Gutov, 2022/12/07
bug#59662: 29.0.50; [PATCH] Add treesit--indent-defun, Eli Zaretskii, 2022/12/01
bug#59662: 29.0.50; [PATCH] Add treesit--indent-defun, Yuan Fu, 2022/12/07