From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Andrea Corallo via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#44554: 27.1; Feature request: SRFI-62 style comments for Emacs Lisp. Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 14:07:46 +0000 Message-ID: References: <4282B0B6-7580-4066-9BAD-369EAD238E2C@acm.org> <87pn4iagd6.fsf@gnus.org> Reply-To: Andrea Corallo Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="24776"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: Mattias =?UTF-8?Q?Engdeg=C3=A5rd?= , Lars Ingebrigtsen , 44554@debbugs.gnu.org, Vladimir Nikishkin , Richard Stallman To: Stefan Kangas Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Nov 13 15:08:11 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@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 1kdZkI-0006IW-Ux for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 15:08:10 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38304 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kdZkH-0006CY-LG for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 09:08:09 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:34244) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kdZkA-0006CN-Bf for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 09:08:02 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:35770) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kdZkA-0003NH-2H for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 09:08:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kdZk9-0001q0-Tz for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 09:08:01 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Andrea Corallo Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 14:08:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 44554 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 44554-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B44554.16052764737042 (code B ref 44554); Fri, 13 Nov 2020 14:08:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 44554) by debbugs.gnu.org; 13 Nov 2020 14:07:53 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47314 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kdZk0-0001pU-So for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 09:07:53 -0500 Original-Received: from mx.sdf.org ([205.166.94.24]:63570) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kdZjx-0001pF-Oq for 44554@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 09:07:51 -0500 Original-Received: from mab (ma.sdf.org [205.166.94.33]) by mx.sdf.org (8.15.2/8.14.5) with ESMTP id 0ADE7k34001048; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 14:07:47 GMT In-Reply-To: (Stefan Kangas's message of "Fri, 13 Nov 2020 05:47:08 -0800") X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:193233 Archived-At: Stefan Kangas writes: > Andrea Corallo writes: > >> That said I believe `comment-dwim' solves already this problem to a good >> degree for me. >> >> given: >> >> (foo (bar)) >> >> having as a region '(bar)' M-; produces >> >> (foo ;; (bar) >> ) > > Indeed. > > What's less fun is when you have to back the change out, or when you > want to incrementally comment out a nested sexp. It works well, but > it's a wee bit fiddly. > > For example, given: > > (foo (bar ... > (baz ...))) > > With `comment-dwim', I might get something like: > > (foo ;; (bar ... > ;; ;; (baz ...) > ;; ) > ) > > This would be more convenient: > > (foo #;(bar ... > #;(baz ...))) Agree, that's one of the reasons why I agree would be nice to have ;) As typically we do not commit commented code is no big deal as we probably (at least I) revert the unnecessary diff hunks, but yeah would be an improvement. Also uncommenting would put the code in the initial state instead of leaving unnecessary newlines. Andrea