From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu May 23 07:36:58 2013 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 May 2013 11:36:58 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57685 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UfTpJ-0008JO-Ug for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 23 May 2013 07:36:58 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:57484) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UfTpI-0008J6-7s for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 23 May 2013 07:36:56 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UfToM-00036y-OM for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 23 May 2013 07:36:01 -0400 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org X-Spam-Level: *** X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,FREEMAIL_FROM, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_BL, RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]:45561) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UfToM-00036u-L1 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 23 May 2013 07:35:58 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:40568) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UfToI-0001R0-Vr for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 23 May 2013 07:35:58 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UfToC-00034y-1r for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 23 May 2013 07:35:54 -0400 Received: from smtp204.alice.it ([82.57.200.100]:59122) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UfT7d-0005tG-UZ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 23 May 2013 06:51:50 -0400 Received: from [192.168.1.100] (80.183.93.76) by smtp204.alice.it (8.6.060.15) (authenticated as angelo.graziosi@alice.it) id 512397E607083098 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 23 May 2013 12:51:44 +0200 Message-ID: <519DF4B7.4020304@alice.it> Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 12:51:35 +0200 From: Angelo Graziosi User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bug-emacs Subject: Wrong indentation in comment lines for F90 mode? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 208.118.235.17 X-Spam-Score: -4.2 (----) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -6.9 (------) Start Emacs with $ emacs -Q & then "C-x C-f foo.f90". Now type "!" to start a comment line and then type M-j to produce other comment lines. The result is as follow: ! ! ! ! ! from the second line, the comment is indented. Repeating the same steps for a C++ mode file, "C-x C-f foo.cpp", the result is // // // // // without indentation. I would expect the same for F90 mode... So, is the behavior in F90 mode to be expected (on purpose) or is it wrong? Ciao, Angelo. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu May 23 13:05:20 2013 Received: (at 14448) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 May 2013 17:05:20 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58496 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UfYx5-0004C9-Tf for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 23 May 2013 13:05:20 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([208.118.235.10]:37063 ident=Debian-exim) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UfYx2-0004C0-AR for 14448@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 23 May 2013 13:05:18 -0400 Received: from rgm by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UfYwC-0001CJ-KH; Thu, 23 May 2013 13:04:24 -0400 From: Glenn Morris To: Angelo Graziosi Subject: Re: bug#14448: Wrong indentation in comment lines for F90 mode? References: <519DF4B7.4020304@alice.it> X-Spook: chameleon man FIPS140 BROMURE global Ermes Cocaine X-Ran: R^)SDo/!$+0}F(ajd4Ui,GMqeE&8Q&GJW'|qYZi8)y>#+dG6m+/t7o{Pd5]p@9ee X-Hue: red X-Debbugs-No-Ack: yes X-Attribution: GM Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 13:04:24 -0400 In-Reply-To: <519DF4B7.4020304@alice.it> (Angelo Graziosi's message of "Thu, 23 May 2013 12:51:35 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus (www.gnus.org), GNU Emacs (www.gnu.org/software/emacs/) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Spam-Score: -6.6 (------) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 14448 Cc: 14448@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -8.0 (--------) Angelo Graziosi wrote: > Start Emacs with > > $ emacs -Q & > > then "C-x C-f foo.f90". Now type "!" to start a comment line and then > type M-j to produce other comment lines. The result is as follow: > > > ! > ! You reported this before. http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=5595 As I said then: I don't understand what comment-indent-new-line is supposed to do, nor which variables modes should set to make it work correctly. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu May 23 13:05:56 2013 Received: (at control) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 May 2013 17:05:56 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58500 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UfYxd-0004DY-TQ for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 23 May 2013 13:05:56 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([208.118.235.10]:37080 ident=Debian-exim) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UfYxa-0004DN-Ik for control@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 23 May 2013 13:05:51 -0400 Received: from rgm by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UfYwl-0001Gp-Ja for control@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 23 May 2013 13:04:59 -0400 Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 13:04:59 -0400 Message-Id: Subject: control message for bug 14448 To: X-Mailer: mail (GNU Mailutils 2.1) From: Glenn Morris X-Spam-Score: -5.3 (-----) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: control X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -6.6 (------) merge 5595 14448 From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu May 23 16:12:54 2013 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 May 2013 20:12:54 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58772 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Ufbsb-0003SH-M7 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 23 May 2013 16:12:53 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:42924) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UfbsZ-0003Rr-J2 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 23 May 2013 16:12:52 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UfbrX-0002pI-K8 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 23 May 2013 16:11:54 -0400 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,FREEMAIL_FROM, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]:40789) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UfbrX-0002p3-Hj for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 23 May 2013 16:11:47 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:54199) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UfbrR-0005Ve-06 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 23 May 2013 16:11:47 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Ufbgw-0007oP-IQ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 23 May 2013 16:01:00 -0400 Received: from smtp203.alice.it ([82.57.200.99]:51648) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Ufbgo-0007kz-B0; Thu, 23 May 2013 16:00:42 -0400 Received: from [192.168.1.100] (80.183.93.76) by smtp203.alice.it (8.6.060.15) (authenticated as angelo.graziosi@alice.it) id 5123A597071183AF; Thu, 23 May 2013 22:00:37 +0200 Message-ID: <519E754D.1030405@alice.it> Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 22:00:13 +0200 From: Angelo Graziosi User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Glenn Morris Subject: Re: bug#14448: Wrong indentation in comment lines for F90 mode? References: <519DF4B7.4020304@alice.it> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 208.118.235.17 X-Spam-Score: -5.5 (-----) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit Cc: bug-emacs , Stefan Monnier X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -6.9 (------) Il 23/05/2013 19.04, Glenn Morris ha scritto: > Angelo Graziosi wrote: > >> Start Emacs with >> >> $ emacs -Q & >> >> then "C-x C-f foo.f90". Now type "!" to start a comment line and then >> type M-j to produce other comment lines. The result is as follow: >> >> >> ! >> ! > > You reported this before. > http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=5595 > > As I said then: > > I don't understand what comment-indent-new-line is supposed to do, nor > which variables modes should set to make it work correctly. > Oh, sorry for the noise then... :( Any way, all my observations I did in that thread are still alive... Stefan, have you some comment? In that thread you wrote: > comment-indent-new-line is written with a "traditional" free text style > of languages and comments, so I'm not surprised it doesn't work 100% F90 is a "free text style of languages and comments" like C++, so one doesn't understand why its comments behaves differently... > right under languages such as Fortran. > It's a nasty function, but I've spent a fair bit of time in it (years > ago), so I should be able to track down the problem. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ (WoW! I didn't remember that... :-) ) Ciao, Angelo. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Fri May 24 23:24:38 2013 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 25 May 2013 03:24:38 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33179 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Ug55x-0005nW-FP for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 24 May 2013 23:24:38 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:47361) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Ug55v-0005nB-RX for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 24 May 2013 23:24:37 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Ug54t-0007mf-0z for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 24 May 2013 23:23:31 -0400 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-99.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, USER_IN_WHITELIST autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]:57370) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Ug54s-0007ma-U9 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 24 May 2013 23:23:30 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:58710) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Ug54r-00058L-HO for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 24 May 2013 23:23:30 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Ug54q-0007m5-GA for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 24 May 2013 23:23:29 -0400 Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.182]:53670) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Ug54q-0007ly-Bo; Fri, 24 May 2013 23:23:28 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av4EABK/CFFFpZoF/2dsb2JhbABEvw4Xc4IeAQEEAVYjBQsLNBIUGA0kiB4GwS2RCgOkeoFegxM X-IPAS-Result: Av4EABK/CFFFpZoF/2dsb2JhbABEvw4Xc4IeAQEEAVYjBQsLNBIUGA0kiB4GwS2RCgOkeoFegxM X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,565,1355115600"; d="scan'208";a="14401910" Received: from 69-165-154-5.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO fmsmemgm.homelinux.net) ([69.165.154.5]) by ironport2-out.teksavvy.com with ESMTP/TLS/ADH-AES256-SHA; 24 May 2013 23:23:22 -0400 Received: by fmsmemgm.homelinux.net (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 0DCA8AE1B4; Fri, 24 May 2013 23:23:27 -0400 (EDT) From: Stefan Monnier To: Angelo Graziosi Subject: Re: bug#14448: Wrong indentation in comment lines for F90 mode? Message-ID: References: <519DF4B7.4020304@alice.it> <519E754D.1030405@alice.it> Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 23:23:27 -0400 In-Reply-To: <519E754D.1030405@alice.it> (Angelo Graziosi's message of "Thu, 23 May 2013 22:00:13 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 208.118.235.17 X-Spam-Score: -6.2 (------) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit Cc: Glenn Morris , bug-emacs X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -6.2 (------) >> I don't understand what comment-indent-new-line is supposed to do, nor >> which variables modes should set to make it work correctly. To tell you the truth, I don't know either. The way I see it, M-j should be bound to a function that funcalls comment-line-break-function (whose default value is comment-indent-new-line). So modes can modify comment-line-break-function (ideally via add-function) to tune its behavior. > F90 is a "free text style of languages and comments" like C++, so one > doesn't understand why its comments behaves differently... I see now that it behaves differently because f90 tells it to, via f90-comment-indent. Try: ! bla ! bli and then hit either TAB or M-; on the second line, and you'll see it gets indented by 1 more space, just like in your example. Stefan From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sat May 25 07:26:05 2013 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 25 May 2013 11:26:05 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33646 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UgCbq-0005Bx-PZ for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 25 May 2013 07:26:05 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:47580) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UgCbo-0005BO-M7 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 25 May 2013 07:26:01 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UgCah-0006k9-Pt for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 25 May 2013 07:24:54 -0400 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,FREEMAIL_FROM, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]:36897) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UgCah-0006k3-Me for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 25 May 2013 07:24:51 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:58924) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UgCae-0004zo-UJ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 25 May 2013 07:24:51 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UgCaZ-0006iS-QU for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 25 May 2013 07:24:48 -0400 Received: from smtp201.alice.it ([82.57.200.97]:44945) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UgCaV-0006hH-FS; Sat, 25 May 2013 07:24:39 -0400 Received: from [192.168.1.100] (79.19.243.20) by smtp201.alice.it (8.6.060.15) (authenticated as angelo.graziosi@alice.it) id 5123901C072F7EF6; Sat, 25 May 2013 13:24:37 +0200 Message-ID: <51A09F6C.20102@alice.it> Date: Sat, 25 May 2013 13:24:28 +0200 From: Angelo Graziosi User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stefan Monnier Subject: Re: bug#14448: Wrong indentation in comment lines for F90 mode? References: <519DF4B7.4020304@alice.it> <519E754D.1030405@alice.it> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 208.118.235.17 X-Spam-Score: -6.9 (------) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit Cc: Glenn Morris , bug-emacs X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -6.9 (------) Il 25/05/2013 5.23, Stefan Monnier ha scritto: >>> I don't understand what comment-indent-new-line is supposed to do, nor >>> which variables modes should set to make it work correctly. > > To tell you the truth, I don't know either. The way I see it, M-j > should be bound to a function that funcalls comment-line-break-function > (whose default value is comment-indent-new-line). So modes can modify > comment-line-break-function (ideally via add-function) to tune > its behavior. > >> F90 is a "free text style of languages and comments" like C++, so one >> doesn't understand why its comments behaves differently... > > I see now that it behaves differently because f90 tells it to, via > f90-comment-indent. Try: > > ! bla > ! bli > > and then hit either TAB or M-; on the second line, and you'll see it > gets indented by 1 more space, just like in your example. Indeed... It seems that this happens only for comments before source code... Anyway, it isn't very important. Thanks for clarification.. Ciao. Angelo. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sat May 25 23:10:12 2013 Received: (at 14448) by debbugs.gnu.org; 26 May 2013 03:10:12 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:35033 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UgRLY-0002Lp-9z for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 25 May 2013 23:10:12 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([208.118.235.10]:34342 ident=Debian-exim) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UgRLV-0002LS-GM for 14448@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 25 May 2013 23:10:10 -0400 Received: from rgm by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UgRKR-0004Ue-FB; Sat, 25 May 2013 23:09:03 -0400 From: Glenn Morris To: Stefan Monnier Subject: Re: bug#14448: Wrong indentation in comment lines for F90 mode? References: <519DF4B7.4020304@alice.it> <519E754D.1030405@alice.it> X-Spook: Marxist covert video cryptographic Fortezza Qaddafi X-Ran: jQ[5U`bAd+D*3'5*TL:Hponq?3DN!%N7i3Esdiu)YvWTzmfMgT (Stefan Monnier's message of "Fri, 24 May 2013 23:23:27 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus (www.gnus.org), GNU Emacs (www.gnu.org/software/emacs/) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Spam-Score: -8.0 (--------) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 14448 Cc: 14448@debbugs.gnu.org, Angelo Graziosi X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -8.0 (--------) Stefan Monnier wrote: > I see now that it behaves differently because f90 tells it to, via > f90-comment-indent. Try: > > ! bla > ! bli > > and then hit either TAB or M-; on the second line, and you'll see it > gets indented by 1 more space, just like in your example. ITYM 2 spaces? This takes me back to my original question: Is M-j supposed to re-indent the line it starts on, or not? If not, is it supposed to indent the following line as it would normally be indented, or to match the indentation of the original line? If the answers are "no", and "as normal", then there is no bug here. > It seems that this happens only for comments before source code... Probably because that is an ambiguous state, depending on whether or not a leading "program" line gets added. See http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=3729#10 From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sat May 25 23:11:45 2013 Received: (at control) by debbugs.gnu.org; 26 May 2013 03:11:45 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:35037 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UgRN1-0002Sn-T0 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 25 May 2013 23:11:45 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([208.118.235.10]:34354 ident=Debian-exim) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UgRMy-0002SX-9I for control@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 25 May 2013 23:11:41 -0400 Received: from rgm by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UgRLv-0004jU-KX for control@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 25 May 2013 23:10:35 -0400 Date: Sat, 25 May 2013 23:10:35 -0400 Message-Id: Subject: control message for bug 14448 To: X-Mailer: mail (GNU Mailutils 2.1) From: Glenn Morris X-Spam-Score: -5.3 (-----) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: control X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -6.6 (------) severity 14448 minor From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun May 26 14:38:08 2013 Received: (at 14448) by debbugs.gnu.org; 26 May 2013 18:38:08 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:35705 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UgfpW-0007CI-Gj for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 26 May 2013 14:38:06 -0400 Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.182]:52244) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UgfpU-0007Bb-M8 for 14448@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 26 May 2013 14:38:05 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av4EABK/CFFFpZ3p/2dsb2JhbABEvw4Xc4IeAQEEAVYjBQsLDiYSFBgNJIgeBsEtkQoDpHqBXoMT X-IPAS-Result: Av4EABK/CFFFpZ3p/2dsb2JhbABEvw4Xc4IeAQEEAVYjBQsLDiYSFBgNJIgeBsEtkQoDpHqBXoMT X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,565,1355115600"; d="scan'208";a="14511698" Received: from 69-165-157-233.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO pastel.home) ([69.165.157.233]) by ironport2-out.teksavvy.com with ESMTP/TLS/ADH-AES256-SHA; 26 May 2013 14:36:43 -0400 Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 59BA363127; Sun, 26 May 2013 14:36:47 -0400 (EDT) From: Stefan Monnier To: Glenn Morris Subject: Re: bug#14448: Wrong indentation in comment lines for F90 mode? Message-ID: References: <519DF4B7.4020304@alice.it> <519E754D.1030405@alice.it> Date: Sun, 26 May 2013 14:36:47 -0400 In-Reply-To: (Glenn Morris's message of "Sat, 25 May 2013 23:09:03 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 14448 Cc: 14448@debbugs.gnu.org, Angelo Graziosi X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) > Is M-j supposed to re-indent the line it starts on, or not? That's unspecified. IIUC it doesn't, currently. > If not, is it supposed to indent the following line as it would normally > be indented, or to match the indentation of the original line? The new line should be indented according to indent-according-to-mode. > If the answers are "no", and "as normal", then there is no bug here. At least w.r.t M-j, that's my impression as well: the only problem is that the OP wants his ! comments to be on column 0 whereas f90-mode puts them in column 1, but that's unrelated to M-j. Stefan From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sat Feb 05 18:44:51 2022 Received: (at 14448) by debbugs.gnu.org; 5 Feb 2022 23:44:51 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:35921 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1nGUja-0007pJ-Ub for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 05 Feb 2022 18:44:51 -0500 Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([95.216.78.240]:50522) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1nGUjY-0007p0-Hq; Sat, 05 Feb 2022 18:44:49 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnus.org; s=20200322; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:Date: References:Subject:Cc:To:From:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=SIoetta+Y5ClO8VFblnNLcabQ5/1FUfb/2lV0n6OU88=; b=KxeoBoNPJ+ZtNFy+jNon/beBvk 4U5mHWLGQ0oiOtc9J+0mRYfeQSONse6fbernYHwO5U7Z0wAQevp/4vTxbM17viecllOz6qJCENUbA VC67t49tBrkl8uHK5oh+ITsG2hKumCvP+z1onBO0+Uc/wohVjOWPbsVNGwmrMGpaDGWc=; Received: from [84.212.220.105] (helo=giant) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1nGUjP-0005Bg-1w; Sun, 06 Feb 2022 00:44:42 +0100 From: Lars Ingebrigtsen To: Angelo Graziosi Subject: Re: bug#14448: Wrong indentation in comment lines for F90 mode? References: <4B7D16C2.3070908@alice.it> X-Now-Playing: Brian Eno's _Another Green World_: "In Dark Trees" Date: Sun, 06 Feb 2022 00:44:37 +0100 In-Reply-To: <4B7D16C2.3070908@alice.it> (Angelo Graziosi's message of "Thu, 18 Feb 2010 11:30:26 +0100") Message-ID: <87k0e898uy.fsf@gnus.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/29.0.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "quimby.gnus.org", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see @@CONTACT_ADDRESS@@ for details. Content preview: Angelo Graziosi writes: > Start Emacs with: > > $ emacs -Q & > > Then visit a new file: > > C-x C-f foo.f90 > > Type '!' (it is at line 1, column 0 in Emacs). > > Then continue to comment: C-M-j. The new '!' is at line 2, co [...] Content analysis details: (-2.9 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 14448 Cc: Glenn Morris , 14448@debbugs.gnu.org, 5595@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Angelo Graziosi writes: > Start Emacs with: > > $ emacs -Q & > > Then visit a new file: > > C-x C-f foo.f90 > > Type '!' (it is at line 1, column 0 in Emacs). > > Then continue to comment: C-M-j. The new '!' is at line 2, column 2 > and not at line 2, column 0, i.e. below the previous '!', as one > expects (at least me!). In other word the second '!' is indended. (I'm going through old bug reports that unfortunately weren't resolved at the time.) I'm unable to reproduce this in more recent Emacs versions, so I'm guessing it's been fixed in the decade since this was reported, and I'm therefore closing this bug report. If this bug is still present, please respond to the debbugs address and we'll reopen. -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sat Feb 05 18:44:57 2022 Received: (at control) by debbugs.gnu.org; 5 Feb 2022 23:44:57 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:35926 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1nGUjh-0007po-H1 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 05 Feb 2022 18:44:57 -0500 Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([95.216.78.240]:50536) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1nGUjg-0007pI-4R for control@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 05 Feb 2022 18:44:56 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnus.org; s=20200322; h=Subject:From:To:Message-Id:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Cc: MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=qeKHzPaN3R1BAdqRLqIS/rFdE8rUq/JkWnLKhVwQQp8=; b=iSJeqaqQJN6ChtWmzlOtM9tXhE wGoHT8iMhUaS7AdPH1rzPeuj5ynjxMAuJ5Me6MuPTJOh5mNYfiNdSJF3spcLkoJzNsEHttUoE/iyw agYjxKT2f30LSgpLcC8EEGa9os4905eW/5LG0dKWKprtl3tvvjc/HuKaTxy2sK+SUmsU=; Received: from [84.212.220.105] (helo=giant) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1nGUjY-0005Bq-3W for control@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 06 Feb 2022 00:44:50 +0100 Date: Sun, 06 Feb 2022 00:44:45 +0100 Message-Id: <87ilts98uq.fsf@gnus.org> To: control@debbugs.gnu.org From: Lars Ingebrigtsen Subject: control message for bug #14448 X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "quimby.gnus.org", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see @@CONTACT_ADDRESS@@ for details. Content preview: close 14448 quit Content analysis details: (-2.9 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: control X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) close 14448 quit From unknown Sat Jun 21 10:39:42 2025 Received: (at fakecontrol) by fakecontrolmessage; To: internal_control@debbugs.gnu.org From: Debbugs Internal Request Subject: Internal Control Message-Id: bug archived. Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2022 12:24:07 +0000 User-Agent: Fakemail v42.6.9 # This is a fake control message. # # The action: # bug archived. thanks # This fakemail brought to you by your local debbugs # administrator