GNU bug report logs - #19102
24.4; outline-move-subtree-up/down error at last and second-last subtree

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Paul Rankin <paul <at> tilk.co>
To: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman <at> gmx.net>
Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>, 19102 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#19102: 24.4; outline-move-subtree-up/down error at last and second-last subtree
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2014 16:46:22 +1000

Stephen Berman <stephen.berman <at> gmx.net> writes:

> On Wed, 19 Nov 2014 22:32:06 +0200 Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> wrote:
>
>>> From: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman <at> gmx.net>
>>> Cc: paul <at> tilk.co,  19102 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
>>> Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2014 21:14:42 +0100
>>> 
>>> > Wouldn't using eolp instead of the comparison solve that problem more
>>> > easily?
>>> 
>>> Well, that eliminates the wrong-type-argument error in the current code,
>>> but it instead signals "End of buffer"
>>
>> From forward-char?  If so, you could avoid the call if eobp.  Or wrap
>> the call in condition-case and ignore errors.
>
> Those solutions work only if there's an empty line after the last
> subtree.  If there isn't, I can't see any way other than my patch.
>
>>> Do you see any other problems with the patch or more room for
>>> improvement?
>>
>> I was worried by the complexity of maybe-forward-char, but maybe now
>> it is much simpler.
>
> I simplified it just a bit more, but that's all I can think of.  I also
> had overlooked a side-effect of the error signaled when trying to move
> the last subtree down: it leaves a dangling newline; this is avoided
> using with-demoted-errors.  The revised patch is appended.
>
> Steve Berman

Sorry if there is some very obvious reason I'm missing, but can't we
just change

    (= (char-after) ?\n)

to

    (eq (char-after) ?\n)

...?

-- 
Paul W. Rankin
http://www.paulwrankin.com

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.