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: Lifting all buffer restrictions in indentation functions Date: Sat, 09 Dec 2017 10:19:06 -0500 Message-ID: References: <83wp1xupqs.fsf@gnu.org> <83shclugwo.fsf@gnu.org> <83mv2sux48.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1512832792 9958 195.159.176.226 (9 Dec 2017 15:19:52 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 9 Dec 2017 15:19:52 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Dec 09 16:19:48 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 1eNguq-0002RZ-Hc for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 09 Dec 2017 16:19:48 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:41680 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eNgux-0003XA-S8 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 09 Dec 2017 10:19:55 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53005) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eNguN-0003Vz-He for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 09 Dec 2017 10:19:20 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eNguI-0005I2-Jx for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 09 Dec 2017 10:19:19 -0500 Original-Received: from [195.159.176.226] (port=40423 helo=blaine.gmane.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eNguI-0005H3-Be for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 09 Dec 2017 10:19:14 -0500 Original-Received: from list by blaine.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1eNgu8-00014v-D0 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 09 Dec 2017 16:19:04 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 19 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:mWwdbFzKjZUX0W8R8nEzSVZf/FU= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 195.159.176.226 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:220823 Archived-At: > It _is_ hypothetical. The question that bothers me is specifically > whether we should flatly disallow those hypothetical cases, just > because we "cannot imagine" them. They can still call indent-line-function, and the extra work that indent-according-to-mode does isn't that much, so if it's *really* indispensable to do "all that indent-according-to-mode does except widen", then you can do it with something like (let* ((ilf indent-line-function) (res (list (point-min) (point-max))) (indent-line-function (lambda (&rest args) (apply #'narrow-to-region res) (apply ilf args)))) (indent-according-to-mode)) -- Stefan