GNU bug report logs - #21526
24.5; prolog-mode: broken indentation for if-then-else construct

Previous Next

Full log

Message #71 received at 21526 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
To: Markus Triska <triska <at> metalevel.at>
Cc: 21526 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#21526: 24.5;
 prolog-mode: broken indentation for if-then-else construct
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2015 05:23:38 -0400

> Yes.  All issues I reported so far are deviations from Stefan Bruda's
> original version.  His version also highlights DCG heads with zero
> arguments correctly.

Hmm... I wonder how we lost this.  Has it always highlighted those, or
is it something newish (e.g. newer than say Emacs-23.3)?

>>> (c) Arguments of directives should be more indented.  For example, a
>>> directive whose arguments span several lines should look like this:
>>> 
>>> :- multifile
>>>        pred1,
>>>        pred2,
>>>        pred3.
>> 
>> I have no idea what "directives" are nor what the above "multifile"
>> means nor what is its syntax.  Does Bruda's code handle that?

> Yes. All issues I reported so far are deviations from Stefan Bruda's
> original version. His version also highlights DCG heads with zero
> arguments correctly.

> A directive starts with :- or ?- in a source file.

> (:-)/1 can be read just like a Prolog rule, only without head. So, after
> :-, I expect the same indentation like in a rule. A directive can
> include any regular Prolog goal.

I don't understand.  You say you want

    :- multifile
           pred1,
           pred2,
           pred3.

and you say that it is indented like in a normal rule, but in normal rule,
I expect neither

    foo(X):- multifile
                 pred1,
                 pred2,
                 pred3.
nor
    foo(X) :- multifile
        pred1,
        pred2,
        pred3.

AFAIK the problem is not with the ":- without a left-hand side", but
with how to parse the

       multifile
           pred1,
           pred2,
           pred3

Currently it's parsed as:

       (multifile
           pred1),
           pred2,
           pred3

whereas clearly you'd like

       multifile
           (pred1,
           pred2,
           pred3)

hence my questions: What means "subsequent lines"?
Anything until a "."?  What about a ";" or a ":-" or a "-->"?
IOW what should happen with something like

     :- multifile
           pred1;
           pred2 -->
           pred3.

Furthermore, it seems that this is linked to the (:-)/1 operator, so
what should happen if "multifile" appears elsewhere?  what other keyword
can appear where you have "multifile" and do they all use this
same syntax?

> Regarding comments, one more thing I noticed is that in a multiline
> comment like /* ... */, we actually expect a small indentation like:

> as in the default C mode, but currently get:
>
> /*
> Not indented.
> */

Indeed, we have some problem here (it seems TAB doesn't even do
anything).  Patch welcome.


        Stefan

Previous Next

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