GNU bug report logs - #37951
27.0.50; octave completion-at-point for fieldnames

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
To: noah <noah.v.peart <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 37951 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#37951: 27.0.50; octave completion-at-point for fieldnames
Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2019 01:53:54 +0100

noah <noah.v.peart <at> gmail.com> writes:

> This is relevant to octave.el (should I be sending to a different
> list or tagging it somehow?)

Yes, this is the correct list.

> The completion-at-point functions in both octave source buffers
> and inferior octave buffers don't complete for fieldnames of
> eg. structs. For example, it would be nice to get completion
> candidates after '.' in these cases
>
>     octave> s(1) = struct('field1', [], 'field2', [])
>     octave> s(2) = struct('field1', [], 'field2', [])
>     octave> s.         # case 1
>     octave> s(1).      # case 2
>     
> This is simply a matter of not capturing the correct bounds of
> objects at point in `octave-completion-at-point` and
> `inferior-octave-completion-at-point`.
>
> The octave function `completion_matches` already returns the correct
> completion candidates ("s.field1" "s.field2") when passed the full
> "s." or "s(1)." strings in the above example.
>
> The following modification to retrieve the bounds of the object
> at point seems to work in both source and inferior buffers.
>
>     (defun my-octave-bounds-of-object-at-point (&optional lim)
>       (let ((beg (save-excursion
>                    (skip-syntax-backward "w_" lim)
>                    ;; just this extra check
>                    (when (eq ?. (char-before))
>                      (forward-char -1)
>                      (and (eq ?\) (char-before)) ; struct(i).
>                           (ignore-errors (backward-sexp)))
>                      (skip-syntax-backward "w_" lim))
>                    (point)))
>             (end (point)))
>         (when (< beg end)                   ; extends region past point
>           (save-excursion
>             (skip-syntax-forward "w_")
>             (setq end (point))))
>         (when (> end beg)
>           (cons beg end))))
>
> However, being pretty new to octave, I'm not sure about all the cases
> where this completion would be applicable.

Could you send the above as a patch or a diff instead?  That would
increase the chances of us being able to integrate and use your
changes.  You should preferably send a patch against the latest
development sources available via git.

Thanks in advance.

Best regards,
Stefan Kangas

Previous Next

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