[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: - c-end-of-defun - !
From: |
Alan Mackenzie |
Subject: |
Re: - c-end-of-defun - ! |
Date: |
18 Apr 2007 20:38:40 +0200 |
Date: |
Wed, 18 Apr 2007 20:58:46 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.9i |
'evening, Alin and Andreas!
Thank you both very much for reporting this bug! (Andreas: the bug you
reported 2 hours after Alin is the same bug.)
On Wed, Apr 18, 2007 at 03:17:00PM +0200, A Soare wrote:
>
> int
> function (void)
> {
> int b;
>
> }
> struct ONE function (void)
> {
> int a;
>
> }
> struct
> TWO function (void)
> {
> int a;
>
> }
>
> Here are 3 valid functions written in C.
> Copy them into a buffer in C-MODE, and eval (end-of defun) in the first one
> and in the second.
> In the second case => FAIL.
> That is because of this code in c-end-of-defun:
>
> ;; Do we need to move forward from the brace to the semicolon?
> (when (eq arg 0)
> (if (c-in-function-trailer-p) ; after "}" of struct/enum, etc.
> (c-syntactic-re-search-forward ";"))
> (c-in-function-trailer-p) in our case MUST return NULL. Not the (point).
This is indeed the case.
> Is really need to call (c-syntactic-re-search-forward ";") here?
Yes. c-end-of-defun is being fooled by the "struct" in the functions'
return types into thinking the function is actually a struct declaration
like this:
struct foo {
int bar ;
int baz ;
} blorg ;
A struct also counts as a defun, and it ends at the first semicolon
following the brace (as contrasted with a function, which ends at the
brace). This is what the (c-syntactic-re-search-forward ";") is for.
The solution is to analyse the defuns' headers more thoroughly. It
shouldn't be too hard, and shouldn't take too long.
> Alin Soare.
--
Alan Mackenzie (Ittersbach, Germany)