Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update julia-mode.el #215

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

kevinli1993
Copy link

Make julia-beginning-of-defun a command

Make `julia-beginning-of-defun` a command
@tpapp
Copy link
Collaborator

tpapp commented Nov 29, 2024

Can you please explain why you need this? This is a function meant to be called by Emacs Lisp code under the usual circumstances.

@kevinli1993
Copy link
Author

Thanks, I see. I hadn't realized elisp's beginning-of-defun would call this function. So indeed it is not needed.

That said, including this would make for a nice symmetry with julia-beginning-of-defun, which is (interactive) even though elisp also has end-of-defun.

I'll defer to you for whether to merge or not.

@non-Jedi
Copy link
Contributor

non-Jedi commented Dec 4, 2024

I think the proper fix is to make julia-end-of-defun non-interactive. I've added a note for this to #136.

Could you do a little digging to see if there's any rationale for why you might want end-of-defun-function to be interactive but not beginning-of-defun-function? I noticed when I was poking around that python-nav-end-of-defun is interactive while python-nav-beginning-of-defun is not; didn't check any other language major modes.

@tpapp
Copy link
Collaborator

tpapp commented Dec 9, 2024

My hunch is that @nverno introduced this in #63 basing the code on the Python mode, and there is no particular reason for it in our codebase. @nverno, any comments?

I am inclined to just remove this. And then address #136, now that we tag versions again 😉

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants