bug#17955: 24.3.92; octave.el: indentation following ... or \

[Stefan Monnier via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" <bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org>]

Lars Ingebrigtsen [2021-05-29 07:06:41] wrote:
> Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:
>> So you should be able to control indentation of "b" above by tweaking
>> the (:after . "=") or (:before . "=") rule.
>
> I've never played around with the SMIE indentation before, but looking
> at other examples, I came up with this:
>
> diff --git a/lisp/progmodes/octave.el b/lisp/progmodes/octave.el
> index a1a5192ee1..5d877fc6ba 100644
> --- a/lisp/progmodes/octave.el
> +++ b/lisp/progmodes/octave.el
> @@ -460,7 +460,8 @@ octave-smie-rules
>           (smie-rule-parent octave-block-offset)
>         ;; For (invalid) code between switch and case.
>         ;; (if (smie-rule-parent-p "switch") 4)
> -       nil))))
> +       nil))
> +    ('(:after . "=") octave-block-offset)))
>  
>  (defun octave-indent-comment ()
>    "A function for `smie-indent-functions' (which see)."
>
> And the results look OK to me:
>
> a = \
>     b
> foo = \
>       dasd
>
> So I've pushed this to Emacs 28; feel free to tweak further.

I suspect this behavior, is still not quite what users would want:
why break the line if the continuation starts where you broke?
Maybe

    ('(:after . "=") (smie-rule-parent octave-block-offset))))

would work better?

And we should add tests for these changes, since regressions are all too
easy to introduce when it comes to indentation rules.


        Stefan