[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#21072: Brave new mark-defun (and a testing tool)
From: |
npostavs |
Subject: |
bug#21072: Brave new mark-defun (and a testing tool) |
Date: |
Mon, 24 Apr 2017 08:52:10 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.2 (gnu/linux) |
Marcin Borkowski <mbork@mbork.pl> writes:
> On 2017-04-22, at 20:05, npostavs@users.sourceforge.net wrote:
>
>>> Still not there - I tried first on Elisp, like this:
>>>
>>> ;; A comment
>>> (defun ...)
>>>
>>> and it left the point at the end of the "A comment" line instead of at
>>> the beginning...
>>
>> Hmm, I don't get that, although I did miss an inf loop when the comment
>> is at beginning of buffer. Here is a fixed version:
>
> Still the same here, also in emacs -Q.
Hmm, I was testing before now just by evaluating the changed functions
after startup, I must have messed something up. I think this one might
be okay.
(defun beginning-of-defun-comments (&optional arg)
"Move to the beginning of ARGth defun, including comments."
(interactive "^p")
(unless arg (setq arg 1))
(beginning-of-defun arg)
(while (let ((pt (line-beginning-position))
(ppss (and (zerop (forward-line -1)) (syntax-ppss))))
(cond ((nth 4 ppss) (goto-char (nth 8 ppss)))
((and ppss
(parse-partial-sexp
(point) (line-end-position) nil t ppss)
(not (bolp)) (eolp)))
(t (goto-char pt) nil)))))
>>
>> Looks good to me (apart from the commit messages).
Actually, now that I've applied this thing properly, I notice 2 test
failures in batch mode:
2 unexpected results:
FAILED mark-defun-arg-region-active
FAILED mark-defun-no-arg-region-active
They pass when run in interactive mode (I haven't looked into why).
>
> What should they look like, then? Should I make all of them into the
> ChangeLog format, or just rebase/squash all of them so that there are
> two of them only (one for the testing tool and one for the
> beginning-of-defun)?
Yeah, I would go ahead and squash them, since you need to rebase to fix
commit messages anyway.
- bug#21072: Brave new mark-defun (and a testing tool), (continued)
- bug#21072: Brave new mark-defun (and a testing tool), npostavs, 2017/04/18
- bug#21072: Brave new mark-defun (and a testing tool), John Mastro, 2017/04/18
- bug#21072: Brave new mark-defun (and a testing tool), John Mastro, 2017/04/19
- bug#21072: Brave new mark-defun (and a testing tool), Marcin Borkowski, 2017/04/20
- bug#21072: Brave new mark-defun (and a testing tool), Marcin Borkowski, 2017/04/21
- bug#21072: Brave new mark-defun (and a testing tool), Marcin Borkowski, 2017/04/21
- bug#21072: Brave new mark-defun (and a testing tool), npostavs, 2017/04/22
- bug#21072: Brave new mark-defun (and a testing tool), Marcin Borkowski, 2017/04/24
- bug#21072: Brave new mark-defun (and a testing tool),
npostavs <=
- bug#21072: Brave new mark-defun (and a testing tool), Marcin Borkowski, 2017/04/25
- bug#21072: Brave new mark-defun (and a testing tool), npostavs, 2017/04/25
- bug#21072: Brave new mark-defun (and a testing tool), Noam Postavsky, 2017/04/25
- bug#21072: Brave new mark-defun (and a testing tool), Marcin Borkowski, 2017/04/27
- bug#21072: Brave new mark-defun (and a testing tool), Noam Postavsky, 2017/04/27
- bug#21072: Brave new mark-defun (and a testing tool), Marcin Borkowski, 2017/04/30
- bug#21072: Brave new mark-defun (and a testing tool), Marcin Borkowski, 2017/04/30
- bug#21072: Brave new mark-defun (and a testing tool), Stefan Monnier, 2017/04/30
- bug#21072: Brave new mark-defun (and a testing tool), Noam Postavsky, 2017/04/30
- bug#21072: Brave new mark-defun (and a testing tool), Stefan Monnier, 2017/04/30