bug#18826: 24.3.94; c++-mode bad indentation after programmatic insert with locally changed syntax table

[Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de>]

Hi, Dmitry.

In article <mailman.12080.1414336227.1147.bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org> you wrote:
> On 10/26/2014 06:24 AM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:

>>> Because the syntax table change is temporary and its effect should be
>>> limited to my code?

>> It's no so limited.  The before-change-functions and after-change-functions
>> hooks will be run with that syntax table active.  This is not good.

> I see, thanks. Somehow, I figured that those hooks would run before or 
> after the current command, whereas they're triggered right near any code 
> that makes changes to the buffer. Question answered, closing.

> On the other hand, you're doing some pretty unusual things with this. If 
> `c-in-sws' and `c-is-sws' were added in syntax-propertize-function 
> (which is called on-demand), this conflict wouldn't have manifested.

They're not syntax-table text properties, so the setting of them doesn't
belong in syntax-propertize.  It wouldn't make sense to do these in
syntax-propertize for a variety of other reasons, such as efficiency.

>> OK.  Can I suggest an alternative?  In C++ (and Java) Modes, the template
>> (generic) delimiters are marked with syntax-table text properties.
>> Unfortunately, at the moment this is done as part of font-locking, so
>> isn't done until you display.  However, if you put "(sit-for 0)" into
>> your code after inserting "< ... >", this will cause a redisplay,
>> allowing subsequent code to use the text properties, and a backward-sexp
>> will then work.

> Sounds like it should be performed during `syntax-propertize' instead. 
> Even if you don't like this idea now, I suspect it'll happen eventually 
> anyway, if only for consistency with other major modes.

Maybe it will, maybe it won't.  `syntax-propertize' has the disadvantage
of inefficiency; at any buffer change, all syntax-table text properties
after the position of the change are effectively wiped out, even where
(as is usual) this isn't necessary.  Also, restoring them means doing so
over a potentially large region of the buffer, rather than just locally
around point.

But, anyway ....

> In that sense, the `sit-for' suggestion is not future-proof. So I'll try 
> only changing the syntax table around specific functions that don't 
> modify the buffer text, but just move point, since that was the actual goal.

Might it be possible that you could get mixed up with less-than and
greater-than (or even shift-right) operators?  If so, be careful!

>> In the medium future (several weeks away), I'm hoping to fix CC Mode so
>> that the text properties are applied to < ... > on an after-change
>> function rather than at redisplay.

...., a change to use syntax-propertize needs the above change to happen
first.

> Hmm. My current workaround is to use a temporary syntax table that 
> inherits from c++-mode-syntax-table (but has angle brackets in the 
> 'paren' class). Sounds like it might also create a conflict, if maybe a 
> more subtle one.

Any reason you don't use the current syntax table as the base to add the
descriptors for < and > to rather than creating a new, blank one?  You
could use `copy-syntax-table'.

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).