On Wed, Jun 22, 2022 at 10:48 PM Kévin Le Gouguec wrote: > Kévin Le Gouguec writes: > > > João Távora writes: > > > >> On a very superficial analysis, I would say you're _not_ experiencing a > >> bug, because setting the f-sexp-f to nil buffer-locally would mean > >> you don't want any python-specific behaviour for triple quotes. > >> > >> It might be a regression for a previous state of the working tree, but > then > >> again that state seems to have been buggy itself, undoubtedly, at least > as > >> described by myself in 0646c6817139. > >> > >> Why are you setting python-forward-sexp-function to nil? > > > > [wall of text follows] > > ( > Hadn't realized we had taken this off-list. FWIW if you found all > my verbiage informative, don't hesitate to (tell me to) forward it > back on the bug tracker. > ) > Ups. That was my mistake. Wondering what to do now. Should we re-send to the tracker. Or let future generations wonder about the missing great wall of text. Anyway, I did find your wall of text informative, particularly this point. > Wondering what the best way forward would be. Maybe a third suggested > value for python-forward-sexp-function, which would handle triple-quotes > but not add those "implicit paired delimiters"? Yes, I think this makes sense. Let's see what other think, but a patch that extracts only that bit from the current functionality and puts it in a third value would be a good idea, I think. João