Subject: bug#25517: 25.1.91; print-format specifier mistaken as comment

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 17:49:43 -0500

Andreas Röhler <[email-masked]> writes:

> On 24.01.2017 16:41, Noam Postavsky wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 10:35 AM, Andreas Röhler
>> <[email-masked]> wrote:
>>>> @@ -165,7 +165,7 @@ octave-mode-syntax-table
>>>> -    (modify-syntax-entry ?\' "."  table)
>>>> +    (modify-syntax-entry ?\' "\""  table)
>>> Thanks. That should be a useful cure in octave-mode.
>>>
>>> A resp. fix seems needed in inferior-octave-mode-map.
>> Huh? What do you think needs changing in inferior-octave-mode-map?
>> That's a keymap? If you meant inferior-octave-mode-syntax-table, then
>> it already inherits everything from octave-mode-syntax-table anyway.
>>
>> (defvar inferior-octave-mode-syntax-table
>>    (let ((table (make-syntax-table octave-mode-syntax-table)))
>>      table)
>>    "Syntax table in use in `inferior-octave-mode' buffers.")
>
> Okay, see. However, it's not gone - see attachment.
> While correct at octave-mode.

That's without the change though, right?

I found out why octave-mode-syntax-table misses this setting:
octave-mode uses a syntax-propertize-function to set the correct syntax
for quotes, it looks like that's needed because of the way backslashes
are handled.

It's not so easy to apply octave-syntax-propertize-function to
inferior-octave-mode to due prompts and output being in the buffer too.
Kind of a similar problem as the multiple mode stuff.