Re: Better indentation for elisp

[Stefan Monnier]

>> I generally like the indentation specifications you suggest (except
>> for `defun': why do we need it?). 
> For backward compatibility.  Aside from this, I'm sure we do not, at all.

OK, that makes sense.

>> So, I think I could be convinced, but only if the new indentation 
>> algorithm is sufficiently simple.
> Well, my algorithm is essentially the same in logic as the standard
> one, plus some code for matching indentation patterns and walking up
> through containing sexps.  This is 300-350 LOC (including heavy
> comments) which would supersede existing 265 lines in "lisp-mode.el".
> Obviously, it is not tested and verified thoroughly.
> If you're interested, I can just post here a diff against "lisp-mode.el".

Please do,


        Stefan