Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>
> > From: Ship Mints <shipmints@gmail.com>
> > Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2024 09:53:15 -0400
> >
> > Greetings. Curious if I'm barking up the wrong tree with this assessment...
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 25, 2024 at 2:33 PM Ship Mints <shipmints@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >  An example of a personal hack to make this work could be to add something like this to a
> >  python-mode-hook:
> >
> >  (if (derived-mode-p 'python-base-mode)
> >    (setq local-abbrev-table python-base-mode-abbrev-table))
> >
> >  On Thu, Jul 25, 2024 at 2:15 PM Ship Mints <shipmints@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >  I was expecting that python-base-mode-abbrev-table would apply to both python-mode and
> >  python-ts-mode buffers. python-ts-mode doesn't derive from python-mode so the abbrev tables
> >  aren't shared by default. Unless I'm missing something, using a base table doesn't work for me.
> >
> >  (define-abbrev-table 'python-mode-abbrev-table ()
> >    "Abbrev table for Python mode."
> >  ;; should this:
> >    :parents (list python-mode-skeleton-abbrev-table))
> >  ;; be defined thusly?
> >    :parents (list python-base-mode-abbrev-table python-mode-skeleton-abbrev-table))
> >
> >  I tried to find guidance on this outside of hacking abbrev tables manually to be shared. Perhaps
> >  other people have the same expectation.
>
> kobarity, any comments?

It seems to me that the skeletons should be defined in
python-base-mode.  How about the attached patch?