[ Expanding on my previous message ]
> Could we revert the change to beginning-of-defun instead?
> It seems clearly incorrect for beginning-of-defun to ignore
> open-paren-in-column-0-is-defun-start.
[ The change I'd like to revert only influences the case where
defun-prompt-regexp is nil so the non-nil case is implicitly outside of
this discussion]
Does it?
The docstring doesn't mention anything about it. And really, when
defun-prompt-regexp is nil, then beginning-of-defun considers that "defun
starts when there is a char with open-parenthesis syntax at the beginning of
a line". So if open-paren-in-column-0-is-defun-start is nil, it's hard to
figure out what should be considered as a defun start.
It's kind of like saying "I won't tell you what it is, I'll just tell you
that it's not what you think".
Note that open-paren-in-column-0-is-defun-start is only used in back_comment
in syntax.c (where we should remove it by making back_comment use
syntax-ppss) and in beginning-of-defun where it was only used to add the
empty string to defun-prompt-regexp.
> For what other reason does C mode set open-paren-in-column-0-is-defun-start?
Maybe because in C defuns do not start with a paren (neither in column 0 nor
elsewhere)?
Or maybe because Alan uses beginning-of-defun for something for which it was
not designed, and thus ends up having to work around beginning-of-defun's
functionality by first setting open-paren-in-column-0-is-defun-start and
defun-prompt-regexp to some usually unused combination and then putting the
code he really wants to use in beginning-of-defun (whereas he should just
use this code directly without going through beginning-of-defun)?
[ I know this sounds like I'm accusing Alan of plotting. I'm not. ]
Stefan
_______________________________________________
emacs-pretest-bug mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-pretest-bug
