[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Don't move to eol in end-of-defun?
From: |
Filipp Gunbin |
Subject: |
Re: Don't move to eol in end-of-defun? |
Date: |
Wed, 03 Aug 2022 15:37:24 +0300 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/29.0.50 (darwin) |
On 02/08/2022 23:46 -0400, Richard Stallman wrote:
> [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider ]]]
> [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]]
> [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]
>
> > In Java, it's a common style to have hanging parentheses:
>
> > class C <1>{<2>
> > void foo() {
> > }<3>
> > }<4>
>
> > If we're at position <1> and press C-M-e, then it's logical to move to
> > <4>,
>
> I'm not convinced. I made end-of-defun move to the newline between defuns,
> usually, because there are situations where it is useful to end up there.
> One of them is in C-M-h (mark-defun), but it's not that alone.
>
> I think these reasons apply to all languages, especially when there's
> a blank line between the defuns.
Yes, that will be the behavior. This post and example were about moving
over the braces vs. moving into them, and <4> will really be on blank
line between defuns.
Thanks.
- Re: Don't move to eol in end-of-defun?, Alan Mackenzie, 2022/08/01
- Re: Don't move to eol in end-of-defun?, Richard Stallman, 2022/08/02
- Re: Don't move to eol in end-of-defun?,
Filipp Gunbin <=
- Re: Don't move to eol in end-of-defun?, Richard Stallman, 2022/08/04
- Re: Don't move to eol in end-of-defun?, Filipp Gunbin, 2022/08/04
- Re: Don't move to eol in end-of-defun?, Richard Stallman, 2022/08/05
- Re: Don't move to eol in end-of-defun?, Alan Mackenzie, 2022/08/06
- Re: Don't move to eol in end-of-defun?, Richard Stallman, 2022/08/07
- Re: Don't move to eol in end-of-defun?, Filipp Gunbin, 2022/08/08