bug#10906: 24.0.94; `c-mark-function' does set the mark well

[Dani Moncayo]

> Hello, Dani.

Hi Alan.

>> > Regarding bug#10906, I think `c-mark-function' should be rewritten
>> > to follow the logic of `mark-defun'.
>
> Any chance of a quick summary of how c-mark-function differs from
> mark-defun?

AFAIK, they differ at least in two things:

1. `mark-defun' saves the original point location in the mark ring,
whereas `c-mark-function' does not.  IMO, the point should be saved,
because in large defuns it may jump to a remote location and you may
want to return back to the original position.  This bug report is
about this inconsistency, as you can see in the original post.

2. Successive interactive invocations of `mark-defun' extend the
region to the next defuns (which I find useful), whereas
`c-mark-function' does not have this feature.  Bug #5525 is a request
to remove this inconsistency, as you can see in the corresponding
thread.

>> Agreed, and BTW, if `c-mark-function' is going to be revised, please,
>> take also this problem into account:
>
>> http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=5525
>
> Again, what is this bug?  Could you not even quote the title line from
> it?

I think this question is already answered.

-- 
Dani Moncayo