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

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

bug#60197: 30.0.50; beginning-of-defun broken after new treesit impl


From: Yuan Fu
Subject: bug#60197: 30.0.50; beginning-of-defun broken after new treesit impl
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2022 21:00:43 -0800

Theodor Thornhill <theo@thornhill.no> writes:

> On 21 December 2022 07:50:04 CET, Yuan Fu <casouri@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>Yuan Fu <casouri@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> Theodor Thornhill <theo@thornhill.no> writes:
>>>
>>>> Hi, Yuan!
>>>>
>>>> It seems 'prog-fill-reindent-defun' is broken after the latest changes
>>>> to treesit-beginning-of-defun.  The culprit is that we now use remap
>>>> instead of setting the beginning-of-defun-function.  What is the
>>>> reasoning behind that change?  Can't we just rely on the variable
>>>> beginning-of-defun-function?
>>>
>>> Not really, end-of-defun uses beginning/end-of-defun-function in a way
>>> that’s incompatible with nested defuns[1]. So if we want to support
>>> navigation nested defuns reliably we need to remap the commands instead.
>>> In the future (ie emacs 30), we can extend the current
>>> beginning/end-of-defun to support nested defuns, then we don’t need to
>>> remap the commands anymore.
>>
>>I see the problem now... Many other functions uses
>>beginning/end-of-defun. I didn’t thought about that initially :-(
>>
>>But I don’t want to make big changes to beg/end-of-deun, hmmm.
>>
>>Yuan
>
>
> I think you can set the functions and remap, right? Maybe you can
> force the beginning-of-defun-function variant to choose the smallest
> scope as a default? Or just follow the same tactic the user set?

Maybe, we can have beg-of-defun-function respect treesit-defun-tactic,
and end-of-defun-function simply jump to the end of the defun at point,
and remap the commands as we do now. I’ll experiment with that and see
if it works well.

Yuan





reply via email to

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