From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Sergey Mozgovoy Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Better indentation for elisp Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2013 06:55:58 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <1361372158545-278835.post@n5.nabble.com> References: <1361217567226-278668.post@n5.nabble.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1361372169 2006 80.91.229.3 (20 Feb 2013 14:56:09 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2013 14:56:09 +0000 (UTC) To: Emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Feb 20 15:56:32 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1U8B5y-0007Ds-Tp for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 15:56:31 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:59128 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U8B5e-0001L6-IA for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 09:56:10 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:39728) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U8B5a-0001JR-M5 for Emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 09:56:09 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U8B5U-0005f4-81 for Emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 09:56:06 -0500 Original-Received: from sam.nabble.com ([216.139.236.26]:35089) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U8B5U-0005ej-2v for Emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 09:56:00 -0500 Original-Received: from [192.168.236.26] (helo=sam.nabble.com) by sam.nabble.com with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1U8B5S-0002LG-Hl for Emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 06:55:58 -0800 In-Reply-To: X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 216.139.236.26 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:157209 Archived-At: > I generally like the indentation specifications you suggest (except > for `defun': why do we need it?). For backward compatibility. Aside from this, I'm sure we do not, at all. > So, I think I could be convinced, but only if the new indentation > algorithm is sufficiently simple. Well, my algorithm is essentially the same in logic as the standard one, plus some code for matching indentation patterns and walking up through containing sexps. This is 300-350 LOC (including heavy comments) which would supersede existing 265 lines in "lisp-mode.el". Obviously, it is not tested and verified thoroughly. If you're interested, I can just post here a diff against "lisp-mode.el". -- View this message in context: http://emacs.1067599.n5.nabble.com/Better-indentation-for-elisp-tp278668p278835.html Sent from the Emacs - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.