From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?UTF-8?Q?Andreas_R=c3=b6hler?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Python interactive navigation around nested functions Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2016 18:23:07 +0200 Message-ID: <54df4d3c-123b-4217-f46b-dedcadebbd6e@online.de> References: <87lh21eq5c.fsf@secretsauce.net> <5767F641.7050108@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1466439623 4029 80.91.229.3 (20 Jun 2016 16:20:23 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2016 16:20:23 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jun 20 18:20:15 2016 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 1bF1vp-0000t9-IJ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 18:20:13 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:44779 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bF1vo-00026k-V1 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 12:20:13 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:60421) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bF1uY-00023D-Ov for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 12:18:55 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bF1uS-0002v4-Kn for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 12:18:53 -0400 Original-Received: from mout.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.131]:53888) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bF1uS-0002uf-Ah for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 12:18:48 -0400 Original-Received: from [192.168.178.35] ([77.12.77.196]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (mreue005) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LiZ4a-1bnGnb0wVY-00ckmC for ; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 18:18:47 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/45.1.0 In-Reply-To: <5767F641.7050108@gmail.com> X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:hwDG++m6J9pVxq0W2oYF6oBGN1VdGTQwjfTT2uGnSfe5+J/41ue f409Rr5fg4MXqMRcIoCuzvIAHIFH098i9NH27mLtxlGujjiMbvZ1jcQBtx+q2DvNX4HExEz Fc/T9+Pfog7+VcQLUMpcLYV9h9twnmtpJmeahldafKyuqtk1JjXeSo7k6HDP6MsO/Txz2Jm lKjuOsMkPDIyET6MIThJQ== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:JKjZ0q3+xEA=:VCxAJbh8soMNLUViAE1X68 q9U4eMy3maAYT/OmZDWfc7HzYwPQ+YFssqgJEGSRhmcMhtstSWg7V3sbY31KZkT0TZdr6WvvE RfOa9yTn4tYRkjfbk0etz6MtLH0WoxQxBpQw3TWZF1n68krn+wBrADLT6UethAsduersBw88f 5GmFU5UeU2Vq5EbBAUn7AxUwD+QyKBUBad4s09K0QA11JRWDbT0kfnUg4JDudOyBlw/szzGC5 BtYydLb7D4am112atiKVhQVpwWVXzLNfQwa6O5J6QtR5j8bb5WnQj2NXVyMbwrvEzn9zFPIuS 7TuDRWQLlvD8jMJe+vYTYqne+MvYYuerZ7ZoLVXobrtM17xwajK9jL42g8p3wckCLLiKfxCNH lJzfR74/vfSYiMWyIYzLPvwz+Im33cTwucA+h73g8Dai9NAb7BWUt0/75zCNUN8CUeSfAkLR5 rNpVes3MhSkBETNdF5HUEdGJ6dZseEYPSOl2Rwurez/GVySafkVLmpz+/c4iiL0BeMtkNuY8E sk6nUJjSNo+gp3MNHaFKiyhPL4SsJLA3tvB5h1AkmEAswHEzKR8AG1rDwis5GdpEPtSPQx1OZ OGACObJCRGil3gz28kKmQmDeGgZjlB2KyfC5OKluQ69ADPpECI0+NE3iWMt98dsdjRs0zJmT5 qAQWUNBPjGFScN30m8kebTLP7i/4VaCtU08rCFwLhLnvEWcEQLDGejdrSnClB8kME0evLuDJp +PHwugBobJxNYjgu X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 212.227.126.131 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:204597 Archived-At: On 20.06.2016 15:57, Clément Pit--Claudel wrote: > On 2016-06-20 04:28, Andreas Röhler wrote: >> On 20.06.2016 09:34, Stefan Monnier wrote: >> >>> So both python-modes behave identically in this respect. That would not >>> be surprising if the behavior you don't like is the one usually >>> considered as right. >> Start and end of a functions definition is not about like or don't like. >> Also not about "usually considered". > I don't understand your aggressiveness, Wherefrom do you derive any? The "you don't like" was introduced by Stefan, not me. > nor your point. Stefan is just pointing out that C-M-a doesn't usually go to the beginning of the enclosing > function definition In any case it's not about enclosing, which would be reached by up-list related stuff, it's about start of current. > (and the docs don't claim that it does, either): > > (beginning-of-defun &optional ARG) > > Move backward to the beginning of a defun. What means "a" defun? User may expect the beginning of definition of code at point. Which is not the case in current python.el, but fixed in python-mode.el meanwhile. > (...) > With ARG, do it that many times. Negative ARG means move forward > to the ARGth following beginning of defun. > > I agree with the OP that it would be very nice to have a way to go back to the beginning of the "current" defun (some sort of super C-M-u). C-M-u would match the enclosing - python-mode.el delivers py-up. But that is not at stake here. > But I don't understand the vitriol. > No idea what you mean.