Re: Indentation of constants in LISP

[A Soare <alinsoar@voila.fr>]

> Message: 11
> Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 14:29:06 +0100
> From: bojohan+news@dd.chalmers.se (Johan Bockg?rd )
> Subject: Re: Indentation of constants in LISP
> To: emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Message-ID: <yoij649x7yal.fsf@gamma02.me.chalmers.se>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
> 
> A Soare <alinsoar@voila.fr> writes:
> 
> > In case that the first symbol of the current line is a constant,
> > the indentation will be:
> >
> >  '( :stipple nil
> >     :background "LightBlue"
> >     :foreground "Black"
> >     :inverse-video nil
> 
> See below.
> 
> > (f p q r :name nil
> >          :server nil

This is OK.

> 
> It's not clear that this is necessarily an improvement.
> 
> 
> Generally, I think that this approach is flawed. It breaks the
> indentation of many forms, and trying to "align" things in this way is
> a bad idea in the first place.
> 
> Problems:
> 
>     (prog2
>         x
>      :y
>      z)
> 
This is not a problem at all, because in this case this old situation is also a problem:

(prog2
    x
    y
  z)



>     (defcustom var :val
>                    :group foo)

This is ok.

> 
>     (foo :a b :c d
>               :e f)

This is OK.

> 
>     (foo a :b c
>          d
>            :e f)

This is ok.

> 
>     (actually, TAB and indent-region produce different results in the
>     last two cases!)

If you take into consideration my definition of the align. it is all ok.


> 
> etc.
> 
> Here's one more:
> 
>     :x   TAB => error
> 

This is not OK.

As I said when I send this improvement, I GAVE NOT a GENERAL DEFINITION of this kind of alignement.

I have taken into consideration just the cases that I needed for my own code.