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

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

[debbugs-tracker] bug#12255: closed (24.2; [PATCH] wrong regexp in c-bas


From: GNU bug Tracking System
Subject: [debbugs-tracker] bug#12255: closed (24.2; [PATCH] wrong regexp in c-basic-matchers-before)
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2012 05:56:01 +0000

Your message dated Wed, 22 Aug 2012 13:54:31 +0800
with message-id <address@hidden>
and subject line Re: bug#12255: 24.2; [PATCH] wrong regexp in 
c-basic-matchers-before
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #12255,
regarding 24.2; [PATCH] wrong regexp in c-basic-matchers-before
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
address@hidden)


-- 
12255: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=12255
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact address@hidden with problems
--- Begin Message --- Subject: 24.2; [PATCH] wrong regexp in c-basic-matchers-before Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2012 11:04:10 +0800
It seems to me this regexp in c-basic-matchers-before would never
succeed unless @ is of word syntax.

(concat "\\<"
        (regexp-opt
         '("@interface" "@implementation" "@protocol")
         t)
        "\\>")

Should this patch be applied?

diff --git a/lisp/progmodes/cc-fonts.el b/lisp/progmodes/cc-fonts.el
index 2d116e1e..f0f40d54 100644
--- a/lisp/progmodes/cc-fonts.el
+++ b/lisp/progmodes/cc-fonts.el
@@ -855,7 +855,7 @@ (c-lang-defconst c-basic-matchers-before
 
            ;; The @interface/@implementation/@protocol directives.
            ,(c-make-font-lock-search-function
-             (concat "\\<"
+             (concat "\\_<"
                      (regexp-opt
                       '("@interface" "@implementation" "@protocol")
                       t)



--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- Subject: Re: bug#12255: 24.2; [PATCH] wrong regexp in c-basic-matchers-before Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2012 13:54:31 +0800 User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.2 (OS X 10.8)
On 2012-08-22 11:04 +0800, Leo wrote:
> It seems to me this regexp in c-basic-matchers-before would never
> succeed unless @ is of word syntax.

Sorry for the noise.

The syntax for @ is word thanks to c-identifier-syntax-modifications.

Leo


--- End Message ---

reply via email to

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