[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: moving in js
From: |
Andreas Röhler |
Subject: |
Re: moving in js |
Date: |
Thu, 09 Aug 2012 19:19:32 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120713 Thunderbird/14.0 |
Am 09.08.2012 18:44, schrieb João Távora:
Not exactly, as common words don't nest, but similar. Will you ever get an
error from "forward-word" unless at the EOB?
No, because words don't nest :-) Lisp sexp's do (as do many other programming
language constructs)
a second invocation would reach "foo"
Then, on the second invocation, backward-sexp would not have "moved backward
across one balanced expression", as its doc states.
hmm, so let's ask what such a balanced expression should be.
If we have the terminus of balanced expression, what will be the non-balanced?
A single operator for example "+"
while "4 + 5" might establish a balanced one. Agreed?
Single words and symbols also are not balanced expressions IMO.
When on ba|z
(foo (bar ba|z) quux)
C-M-b would reach |baz
(foo (bar |baz) quux)
i.e, it would do backward-word
a repeat would do backward-word again, a third would error
Can't see any relation to stipulated move over balanced expression here.
Looks fairly arbitrary.
CC to help, as it might be of some interest for others to.
I think you might be looking for "scan-lists", it lets you move whithin the same
level and pop out and in of lists. Uses the syntax tables. I used it in
http://github.com/capitaomorte/autopair
- moving in js, Andreas Röhler, 2012/08/07
- Re: moving in js, Peter Dyballa, 2012/08/07
- Re: moving in js, Andreas Röhler, 2012/08/08
- Re: moving in js, João Távora, 2012/08/08
- Re: moving in js, Andreas Röhler, 2012/08/09
- Message not available
- Re: moving in js, Andreas Röhler, 2012/08/09
- Message not available
- Re: moving in js,
Andreas Röhler <=
- Re: moving in js, João Távora, 2012/08/09
- Re: moving in js, Andreas Röhler, 2012/08/10
- Message not available
- Re: moving in js, Andreas Röhler, 2012/08/10