From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Removing no-back-reference restriction from syntax-propertize-rules Date: Tue, 19 May 2020 11:06:11 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87wo5cff39.fsf@gnu.org> <87tv0dayv1.fsf@gnu.org> <87r1vh2ao7.fsf@gnu.org> <87blmkt5no.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="6034"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue May 19 17:36:51 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jb4IU-0001Vu-Pz for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 19 May 2020 17:36:50 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:49306 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jb4IT-00023b-Rw for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 19 May 2020 11:36:49 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:46428) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jb3oy-0006RX-TL for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 19 May 2020 11:06:20 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:56041) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jb3oy-0005XM-4m for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 19 May 2020 11:06:20 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id E775D10033A; Tue, 19 May 2020 11:06:18 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 2FC6C1002FC; Tue, 19 May 2020 11:06:13 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1589900773; bh=rualBrZoCvwkPOR8zjvmIZAbf4nkrwp0oRBhfDFZp9I=; h=From:To:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=Dr8E50hhdSKd4GdBhID7gAcbMJ4lzFwwrV1p6ocuqerSEIS5WC7eSKR1N1urvre2w n6397Pu3AKB5mE04YDxZhwnL1zBlDUZ5Sc5HE+7R0YaCUQDzRN1c7Qj9A/R1UFVrpY Cgsc/tXsSTqt6qwjfXyCU49utQLtINfb1kAiJagyL11zWJ7vF9ZEUYtVr6GuOnuWzt VmhS6J58tDW9oPGpXhd0BRE3Wlrrj90yH52xztMacMVLSTnVgPo1MHFXFxKdVwz/b8 XQ+bpEvnjlp6njZ0aWf24kCaMev2IG5/GvjZTwiP+uUOHmkMCrxrltUoVdf4MFL4cc D5DDb8D/4SvNw== Original-Received: from alfajor (unknown [216.154.27.250]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0317D12027A; Tue, 19 May 2020 11:06:12 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <87blmkt5no.fsf@gnu.org> (Tassilo Horn's message of "Tue, 19 May 2020 15:28:59 +0200") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/05/19 11:02:05 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Spam_score_int: -42 X-Spam_score: -4.3 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001 autolearn=_AUTOLEARN X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:250951 Archived-At: >> Looks good. IRC you had some tests to along with it. >> If you could install them at the same time, that would be great. > Of course. I guess it is ok to only test the shifting function? Yes. > Or something more elaborate that puts text in a temp buffer, makes > a syntax-propertize-function with syntax-propertize-rules and checks > if the 'syntax-table properties get applied as expected? Any test is better than no test at this point, so ... take your pick. Stefan