Subject: bug#62027: closed (Re: bug#62027: Subject: 29.0.60; Breaking change in forward-sentence/backward-sentence)

From: [email-masked] (GNU bug Tracking System)
Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2023 19:33:01 +0000

Your bug report

#62027: Subject: 29.0.60; Breaking change in forward-sentence/backward-sentence

which was filed against the emacs package, has been closed.

The explanation is attached below, along with your original report.
If you require more details, please reply to [email-masked].

-- 
62027: https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=62027
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact [email-masked] with problems

Subject: Re: bug#62027: Subject: 29.0.60; Breaking change in forward-sentence/backward-sentence
From: Eli Zaretskii <[email-masked]>
To: Manuel Giraud <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2023 21:32:32 +0200
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>

> From: Manuel Giraud <[email-masked]>
> Cc: [email-masked],  [email-masked],  [email-masked]
> Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2023 20:07:44 +0100
> 
> Eli Zaretskii <[email-masked]> writes:
> 
> [...]
> 
> > I tried, but it doesn't apply.  Did you produce the patch from the
> > emacs-29 branch or from some other branch?
> 
> Sorry, I produced it on master.  Here is the one for emacs-29.

Thanks, installed.

> Will this appear on master at a later time?

Yes, in a day or two.

Subject: Subject: 29.0.60; Breaking change in forward-sentence/backward-sentence
From: Simen Heggestøyl <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Cc: Manuel Giraud <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2023 08:31:49 +0100
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>

Hi.

Commit 460d5fd971489ba7b573d71a94cdaac2f9f1a767 introduced a new
function `count-sentences', which is nice, but it also silently changed
the return value of `forward-sentence' (and thus also
`backward-sentence') from returning the new value of point to returning
t/nil based on whether point moved or not.

I just discovered this because it caused one of my packages to break,
since it relies on the previous style return values from
`forward-sentence'/`backward-sentence'. It would be easy enough fix on
my part, but I'm wondering whether this change was intended, and if so,
whether it should be documented somewhere so package authors can adapt
more easily?

Or could perhaps the change in return values from
`forward-sentence'/`backward-sentence' be reverted to old behavior, and
the counting logic be left to `count-sentences' instead?

-- Simen