help-gnu-emacs
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: thing-at-point: inconsistent behaviour?


From: Andreas Röhler
Subject: Re: thing-at-point: inconsistent behaviour?
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2012 13:52:38 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120713 Thunderbird/14.0

Am 15.08.2012 21:00, schrieb Raffaele Ricciardi:
On 08/15/2012 07:34 PM, Barry Margolin wrote:
 > In article <a926tjFeslU1@mid.individual.net>,
 >   Raffaele Ricciardi <rfflrccrd@gmail.com> wrote:
 >
 >> Hello there,
 >>
 >> the documentation of `thing-at-point' states that such function returns "the
 >> thing around or next to point".  This is not the case with either
 >> (thing-at-point
 >> 'symbol) or (thing-at-point 'sexp), for they both may return the thing
 >> before
 >> point.  Try it with the following snippet (! symbolizes the point):
 >
 > Doesn't "next to" include both immediately before and immediately after?

I stand corrected after having consulted a dictionary.  Then it is
(thing-at-point 'list) that is misbehaving.



hmm, IMHO you was right. Here is the code

(defun symbol-at-point ()
  "Return the symbol at point, or nil if none is found."
  (let ((thing (thing-at-point 'symbol)))
    (if thing (intern thing))))

last line don't return the thing as delivered by thing-at-point but the result 
of (intern thing)

that way breaking consistency.

BTW built a library at top of thing-at-point rationale, which aims to avoid that

https://launchpad.net/s-x-emacs-werkstatt/trunk/1.3/+download/S-X-Emacs-Werkstatt-1.3.tar.gz



 >
 >>
 >> A!
 >> (A)!
 >>
 >> On the contrary, (bounds-of-thing-at-point 'list) returns nil as
 >> expected in this
 >> snippet:
 >>
 >> (A)!
 >>
 >> Is this inconsistent behaviour or am I missing something?
 >>
 >> Tested on GNU Emacs 24.1 started with "emacs -Q".
 >>
 >> Thank you.
 >
 > I think this is a problem with the thing-at-point handler for 'list.
 > It's doing some weird stuff, that I think is intended to distinguide
 > lists from sexps.

Aren't lists sexps as well?





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]