bug#12785: [octave-mod] Changed behaviour of octave-mark-block?

[Mark Hepburn]

Thanks.

On 5 December 2012 16:30, Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> wrote:
>> Regarding the "end|" case, the old mode wouldn't mark the block, and I feel
>> that's correct behaviour.  In the "|for" case as I mentioned, the old mode
>> _did_ mark the block (not the enclosing one), but I agree that marking the
>> enclosing block is probably preferable and more consistent.
>
> Indeed, the code tried to reproduce this "mark the block after point
> instead of the enclosing one" but had a bug in it.
> I've fixed the "starting within a token" problem as well as the above
> check (so the inner `for' will be marked if you're right in front of it).
>
>
>         Stefan
>
>
> === modified file 'lisp/progmodes/octave-mod.el'
> --- lisp/progmodes/octave-mod.el        2012-09-17 05:41:04 +0000
> +++ lisp/progmodes/octave-mod.el        2012-12-05 05:21:07 +0000
> @@ -794,11 +794,14 @@
>    "Put point at the beginning of this Octave block, mark at the end.
>  The block marked is the one that contains point or follows point."
>    (interactive)
> +  (if (and (looking-at "\\sw\\|\\s_")
> +           (looking-back "\\sw\\|\\s_" (1- (point))))
> +      (skip-syntax-forward "w_"))
>    (unless (or (looking-at "\\s(")
>                (save-excursion
>                  (let* ((token (funcall smie-forward-token-function))
>                         (level (assoc token smie-grammar)))
> -                  (and level (null (cadr level))))))
> +                  (and level (not (numberp (cadr level)))))))
>      (backward-up-list 1))
>    (mark-sexp))
>
>



-- 
Where the hell is Mark:
http://blog.everythingtastesbetterwithchilli.com/