On Thu, Feb 02 2023, Yang Yingchao wrote: > On Wed, Feb 01 2023, Theodor Thornhill wrote: > >> Eli Zaretskii writes: >> >>>> Cc: yang.yingchao@qq.com >>>> Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2023 14:33:24 +0800 >>>> From: Yang Yingchao via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, >>>> the Swiss army knife of text editors" >>>> >>>> >>>> #define SWITCH() >>>> #define CASE(name) case name: >>>> >>>> void func(int i) // LINE_E >>>> { >>>> SWITCH(i) // LINE_D >>>> { >>>> CASE(A) // LINE_C >>>> { >>>> ; >>>> } >>>> CASE(B) // LINE_B >>>> { >>>> ; // LINE_A >>>> } >>>> } >>>> } >>>> >>>> When cursor is at LINE_A, and stoke `C-M-a`, cursor will go to LINE_B; >>>> then `C-M-a` again, cursor goes to LINE_C, then `C-M-a` again, LINE_D, >>>> and `C-M-a` again, finally to LINE_E... >>> >>> Set treesit-defun-tactic to 'top-level, and your problem is solved. >>> >>> Yuan, Theo: do we want to have that set by default in ts-c-mode? C >>> doesn't have nested functions, so it should be a better default, what >>> with all the cpp madness that the C grammar doesn't grok. >>> >>> Maybe also in C++ and Java -- AFAIU they don't have nested functions >>> either. >>> >>> WDYT? >> >> I'm fine with that change, I think. Other, "smaller" constructs can be >> found as sentences or sexps anyway, I think. >> >> Theo > Thanks for the help. But in the following C++ code, is it possible to make treesit-beginning/end-of-defun behaves the same as c++-mode ? ,---- | class Test // LINE_D | { | public: | Test(int i) // LINE_C | { | SWITCH(i) | { | CASE(A) | { | ; | } | CASE(B) // LINE_B | { | ; // LINE_A | } | } | } | }; `---- When cursor is at LINE_A, if in c++-mode, `C-M-a` moves cursor to LINE_C, which is correct. But in c++-ts-mode, behaviour of `C-M-a` is wrong: if treesit-defun-tactic is nested, it moves to line_B, and if treesit-defun-tactic is top-level, it moves to LINE_D. Both of them are actually wrong... -- Yang Yingchao Yang Yingchao