GNU bug report logs - #7614
Is (thing-at-point 'url) hallucinating too much?

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 7614 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 7614 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Lennart Borgman <lennart.borgman <at> gmail.com>
To: Emacs Bugs <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>
Subject: Is (thing-at-point 'url) hallucinating too much?
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2010 02:06:32 +0100

(thing-at-point 'url) thinks WORD is the url http://WORD.

(url-get-url-at-point) does not see any url there.

I think thing-at-point is a bit too afraid of failing to find an url.
Maybe the latter function could learn thing-at-point to be a bit
braver and see reality a bit clearer?

This thing-at-point lives in a trunk checkout from 2010-10-19.

Message #10 received at 7614 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>
To: Lennart Borgman <lennart.borgman <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 7614 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#7614: Is (thing-at-point 'url) hallucinating too much?
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 04:00:53 +0200

Lennart Borgman <lennart.borgman <at> gmail.com> writes:

> (thing-at-point 'url) thinks WORD is the url http://WORD.
>
> (url-get-url-at-point) does not see any url there.
>
> I think thing-at-point is a bit too afraid of failing to find an url.
> Maybe the latter function could learn thing-at-point to be a bit
> braver and see reality a bit clearer?

Would it make sense just to have

(thing-at-point 'url)

just call

(url-get-url-at-point)

to avoid code duplication?  On the other hand, thingatpt is meant to be
really sloppy, so I'm not sure it's a bug at all.

For instance, `thing-at-point' will do the right thing with this "url":

gnus.org

while `url-get-url-at-point' doesn't...

So perhaps a sufficient fix would be to require that the word should
have a dot in it somewhere?

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
  bloggy blog http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no/

Message #15 received at 7614-close <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <lmi <at> gnus.org>
To: Lennart Borgman <lennart.borgman <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 7614-close <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#7614: Is (thing-at-point 'url) hallucinating too much?
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 04:06:00 +0200

Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org> writes:

> So perhaps a sufficient fix would be to require that the word should
> have a dot in it somewhere?

I've now committed this change.

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
  bloggy blog http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no/

Message #16 received at 7614-close <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Lennart Borgman <lennart.borgman <at> gmail.com>
To: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <lmi <at> gnus.org>
Cc: 7614-close <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#7614: Is (thing-at-point 'url) hallucinating too much?
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 11:27:22 +0200

On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 04:06, Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <lmi <at> gnus.org> wrote:
> Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org> writes:
>
>> So perhaps a sufficient fix would be to require that the word should
>> have a dot in it somewhere?
>
> I've now committed this change.

Thanks.

Previous Next

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