From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Juri Linkov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#10899: 24.0.93; c-forward-conditional should not move the mark Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 02:14:05 +0200 Organization: JURTA Message-ID: <87399ua436.fsf@mail.jurta.org> References: <83haycdnqt.fsf@gnu.org> <87399v2qsp.fsf@mail.jurta.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1330474948 18081 80.91.229.3 (29 Feb 2012 00:22:28 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 00:22:28 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 10899@debbugs.gnu.org To: Dani Moncayo Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Feb 29 01:22:27 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@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 1S2XJK-00018P-14 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 29 Feb 2012 01:22:26 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:57785 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S2XJJ-00022I-4r for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 28 Feb 2012 19:22:25 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:41988) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S2XJF-00021d-MU for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 28 Feb 2012 19:22:22 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S2XJE-000182-0l for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 28 Feb 2012 19:22:21 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:48061) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S2XJB-00016h-BE; Tue, 28 Feb 2012 19:22:17 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1S2XIw-0003sd-6i; Tue, 28 Feb 2012 19:22:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Juri Linkov Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org, bug-cc-mode@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 00:22:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 10899 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs,cc-mode X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 10899-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B10899.133047489714879 (code B ref 10899); Wed, 29 Feb 2012 00:22:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 10899) by debbugs.gnu.org; 29 Feb 2012 00:21:37 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54893 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1S2XIX-0003rm-4j for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 28 Feb 2012 19:21:37 -0500 Original-Received: from ps18281.dreamhost.com ([69.163.218.105]:48323 helo=ps18281.dreamhostps.com) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1S2XIJ-0003rM-Nk for 10899@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 28 Feb 2012 19:21:25 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost (ps18281.dreamhostps.com [69.163.218.105]) by ps18281.dreamhostps.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 907D1451C1B1; Tue, 28 Feb 2012 16:19:25 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: (Dani Moncayo's message of "Tue, 28 Feb 2012 12:12:32 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.93 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:57379 Archived-At: > Regarding your patch, I think it clearly improve the current behavior, > but I want to emphasize again that, IMO, setting the mark in too many > commands is bad, because it overfills the mark ring, thus making > harder to return to earlier positions. What I wanted to achieve is to make C movement commands to behave exactly as their Lisp counterparts. I see the following correspondence: leaves mark behind? c-beginning-of-defun beginning-of-defun yes c-end-of-defun end-of-defun yes c-mark-function mark-defun yes c-up-conditional backward-up-list no c-down-conditional down-list no c-backward-conditional backward-list no c-forward-conditional forward-list no So I agree that `c-forward-conditional' and `c-backward-conditional' should not push the mark. Regarding bug#10906, I think `c-mark-function' should be rewritten to follow the logic of `mark-defun'.