From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: smie-next-sexp vs associative operators Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 17:01:52 -0400 Message-ID: References: <85lif9e7m8.fsf@member.fsf.org> <851uh0x59u.fsf@stephe-leake.org> <85ehktijxl.fsf@stephe-leake.org> <85hapnhnwy.fsf@member.fsf.org> <851ugoernt.fsf@member.fsf.org> <851ugna0ym.fsf@member.fsf.org> <851ugm8iq5.fsf@member.fsf.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1351198917 29898 80.91.229.3 (25 Oct 2012 21:01:57 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 21:01:57 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stephen Leake Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Oct 25 23:02:05 2012 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 1TRUZ2-0000B4-F1 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 25 Oct 2012 23:02:04 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:42424 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TRUYu-0000jO-H0 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 25 Oct 2012 17:01:56 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:40893) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TRUYs-0000jJ-LU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 25 Oct 2012 17:01:55 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TRUYr-00017K-My for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 25 Oct 2012 17:01:54 -0400 Original-Received: from pruche.dit.umontreal.ca ([132.204.246.22]:58791) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TRUYr-00017F-Iv for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 25 Oct 2012 17:01:53 -0400 Original-Received: from faina.iro.umontreal.ca (lechon.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.27.242]) by pruche.dit.umontreal.ca (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id q9PL1qcP008583; Thu, 25 Oct 2012 17:01:52 -0400 Original-Received: by faina.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 9BA91B4278; Thu, 25 Oct 2012 17:01:52 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <851ugm8iq5.fsf@member.fsf.org> (Stephen Leake's message of "Thu, 25 Oct 2012 15:17:06 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.2 (gnu/linux) X-NAI-Spam-Flag: NO X-NAI-Spam-Threshold: 5 X-NAI-Spam-Score: 0 X-NAI-Spam-Rules: 1 Rules triggered RV4382=0 X-NAI-Spam-Version: 2.2.0.9309 : core <4382> : streams <845419> : uri <1252401> 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: 2.1.14 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:154510 Archived-At: >> That would bring back some of the benefits, but not those for >> indentation and I still haven't seen a concrete case where such >> a setting in indentation would be useful (I'm not saying your case isn't >> one such example, but I still haven't seen your concrete case). > I started this thread with a specific example. No. By specific example, I meant also the corresponding smie-indent-rules, which I haven't seen (if you included them, I missed them). Stefan