On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 12:38 AM Noam Postavsky wrote: > > > 1. Does it fix the reported problem (assuming it is a problem, and not > > an otherwise potentially desirable change in behaviour)? > > It does fix the problem. > It reintroduces the previous behaviour, I gather. Can you explain quickly why it was "a problem"? > > 2. Do any of you have suspicions that it might introduce problems > > elsewhere? > > I'm unsure. It seems to be undoing a small part of [fd94312443] > 2019-01-22 "electric-layout-mode kicks in before electric-pair-mode", so > I guess it might rebreak whatever that commit is fixing. But I don't > quite understand what that commit is fixing (in particular, where the > commit message says "which can be a problem in some modes", which modes > are those? What is "a problem"?). > Sorry, can't say without investigating much more than time allows. Can you post the complete sentence? I vaguely remember that if electric-pair-mode kicked in before electric-layout-mode we would need more complex layout specs and more painful indentation logic. That's why I changed it. There is a thread of discussion with Stefan somewhere about this, not sure if public or off-list. > > 3. Does it pass the automated test suite? > > No, it breaks 3 tests in tests/lisp/electric.el: > > 3 unexpected results: > FAILED electric-layout-int-main-kernel-style > FAILED electric-layout-plainer-c-mode-use-c-style > FAILED electric-modes-int-main-allman-style > > In each case, the reason for failure is that the expected result has > trailing whitespace that the actual result misses. I guess > electric-layout does want to put trailing whitespace in certain cases? > Yes, it certainly does. That trailing whitespace is indentation, I believe. And the cursor should be left at that indentation. Can you confirm? Anyway, if it's breaking tests it's almost certainly not what we want. And if it breaks in "plainer-c-mode" (a slightly better behaved c-mode), then its even more certain that it's not what we want. ... unless the tests are demading something unreasonable from the electric modes, of course. -- João Távora