From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Bug #25608 and the comment-cache branch Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2017 17:33:29 -0500 Message-ID: References: <20170202202418.GA2505@acm> <9d0b3156-e8b2-c2d8-0d0c-a025861e5e0c@yandex.ru> <20170203164457.GB2250@acm> <20170204110259.GB2047@acm> <20170206200116.GD3568@acm> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1486420465 3086 195.159.176.226 (6 Feb 2017 22:34:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2017 22:34:25 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Alan Mackenzie Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Feb 06 23:34:21 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1carrX-0000fK-2L for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 06 Feb 2017 23:34:19 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50970 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1carrc-000221-Lm for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 06 Feb 2017 17:34:24 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:59724) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1carqp-00020G-8C for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Feb 2017 17:33:36 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1carqm-0000HX-15 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Feb 2017 17:33:35 -0500 Original-Received: from pruche.dit.umontreal.ca ([132.204.246.22]:49108) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1carql-0000HH-SR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Feb 2017 17:33:31 -0500 Original-Received: from pastel.home (lechon.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.27.242]) by pruche.dit.umontreal.ca (8.14.7/8.14.1) with ESMTP id v16MXTIh026350; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 17:33:29 -0500 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 492C160982; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 17:33:29 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <20170206200116.GD3568@acm> (Alan Mackenzie's message of "Mon, 6 Feb 2017 20:01:16 +0000") X-NAI-Spam-Flag: NO X-NAI-Spam-Threshold: 5 X-NAI-Spam-Score: 0 X-NAI-Spam-Rules: 2 Rules triggered EDT_SA_DN_PASS=0, RV5941=0 X-NAI-Spam-Version: 2.3.0.9418 : core <5941> : inlines <5674> : streams <1731802> : uri <2372730> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 132.204.246.22 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:212065 Archived-At: >> char foo[] = "for (x = 0; x < n; x++) /* Loop header */\n"; >> ^ ^ >> where the user narrows to the string, then goes to EOL and does >> M-: (forward-comment -1) > Even if the user narrows to the string, it's still a string. It's not a > comment, and can't be one. As the user who did the above operation I beg to differ: I narrowed specifically because I wanted to treat this as the chunk of C code it is. It would be arrogant for Emacs to claim it knows better than the user. Stefan