From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: A Soare Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Indentation of LISP code Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2007 18:01:23 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <33169861.220581175788883924.JavaMail.www@wwinf4102> Reply-To: alinsoar@voila.fr NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1175789030 11679 80.91.229.12 (5 Apr 2007 16:03:50 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2007 16:03:50 +0000 (UTC) Cc: "Emacs Dev \[emacs-devel\]" To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Apr 05 18:03:39 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HZUQz-000491-V4 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 05 Apr 2007 18:03:38 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HZUUN-0003le-Kf for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 05 Apr 2007 12:07:07 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HZUSJ-0002ku-Gp for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 05 Apr 2007 12:04:59 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HZUSG-0002dh-4M for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 05 Apr 2007 12:04:58 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HZUSF-0002dF-Va for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 05 Apr 2007 12:04:56 -0400 Original-Received: from smtp2.voila.fr ([193.252.22.175] helo=smtp1.voila.fr) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1HZUOr-0004WZ-Gk for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 05 Apr 2007 12:01:25 -0400 Original-Received: from me-wanadoo.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mwinf4101.voila.fr (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id F39F91C0037C; Thu, 5 Apr 2007 18:01:23 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from wwinf4102 (wwinf4102 [172.22.152.29]) by mwinf4101.voila.fr (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id E4BFD1C00355; Thu, 5 Apr 2007 18:01:23 +0200 (CEST) X-ME-UUID: 20070405160123937.E4BFD1C00355@mwinf4101.voila.fr X-Originating-IP: [89.34.170.37] X-Wum-Nature: EMAIL-NATURE X-WUM-FROM: |~| X-WUM-TO: |~| X-WUM-CC: |~| X-WUM-REPLYTO: |~| X-detected-kernel: Linux 2.4-2.6 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:69088 Archived-At: > I don't understand the problem. The only difference I can see is that > a space gets added before ";;;". Lisp's indent-region does both re-indent > the code and the comments, so it's completely expected behavior. Put instead ;;; just 2 comments then just 1. You will see that using ;;; is the same case as with ;;. When we put ;;; the indent of the comment must not change, so (nil);;; this is a comm must not change. A Soare.