bug#37458: 27.0.50; number-at-point misses hex

bug#37458: 27.0.50; number-at-point misses hex

[Andreas Röhler]

number-at-point from thingatpt.el doesn't recognize hex-numbers.

Currently defined like that:

(defun number-at-point ()
   "Return the number at point, or nil if none is found."
   (when (thing-at-point-looking-at "-?[0-9]+\\.?[0-9]*" 500)
     (string-to-number
      (buffer-substring (match-beginning 0) (match-end 0)))))

Maybe make the regexp customizable?

Thanks,

Andreas

In GNU Emacs 27.0.50 (build 1, x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, GTK+ Version 2.24.32)
  of 2019-09-12

bug#37458: 27.0.50; number-at-point misses hex

[Lars Ingebrigtsen]

Andreas Röhler <andreas.roehler@easy-emacs.de> writes:

> number-at-point from thingatpt.el doesn't recognize hex-numbers.
>
> Currently defined like that:
>
> (defun number-at-point ()
> \240 "Return the number at point, or nil if none is found."
> \240 (when (thing-at-point-looking-at "-?[0-9]+\\.?[0-9]*" 500)
> \240\240\240 (string-to-number
> \240\240\240\240 (buffer-substring (match-beginning 0) (match-end 0)))))

(You have something odd in your emails -- it seems like leading spaces
are transformed into char 240.)

I've now changed this to recognise some hex numbers if they're preceded
by #x or 0x.  Just looking for "bare" hex numbers may return too many
false positives.

> Maybe make the regexp customizable?

That wouldn't help much since the string has to be transformed to a
number in the right base.

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no

bug#37458: 27.0.50; number-at-point misses hex

[Andreas Röhler]

On 20.09.19 19:41, Lars Ingebrigtsen wrote:
> Andreas Röhler <andreas.roehler@easy-emacs.de> writes:
>
>> number-at-point from thingatpt.el doesn't recognize hex-numbers.
>>
>> Currently defined like that:
>>
>> (defun number-at-point ()
>> \240 "Return the number at point, or nil if none is found."
>> \240 (when (thing-at-point-looking-at "-?[0-9]+\\.?[0-9]*" 500)
>> \240\240\240 (string-to-number
>> \240\240\240\240 (buffer-substring (match-beginning 0) (match-end 0)))))
> (You have something odd in your emails -- it seems like leading spaces
> are transformed into char 240.)

Sent from thunderbird. Not visible here. Also don't get the error when 
copying back from previous mail.


>
> I've now changed this to recognise some hex numbers if they're preceded
> by #x or 0x.  Just looking for "bare" hex numbers may return too many
> false positives.

Thanks.


>> Maybe make the regexp customizable?
> That wouldn't help much since the string has to be transformed to a
> number in the right base.
>