[Geany-devel] Parentheses auto-indentation

[Lex Trotman]

On 13 June 2010 03:09, Colomban Wendling <lists.ban at herbesfolles.org> wrote:
> Le 09/06/2010 02:48, Lex Trotman a écrit :
>>>> Also brace_match ability to go forward and backward is wasted since it
>>>> is only ever called from close_brace which AFAICT is only ever called
>>>> with the current character a }
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Why brace_match() uses the character at (pos - 1) but the style at (pos)?
>>>>> This seems to be needed for brackets but breaks with parentheses (see
>>>>> comments in the WIP patch).
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Hmmm, actually the question is how do braces work when it does that?
>>>>
>>>> Probably pos is always > sci_get_end_styling since a } has just been
>>>> added to the buffer and the scintilla documentation says the charadded
>>>> notification is called before styling is done.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> It doesn't seems that simple since if I replace pos by pos - 1, the
>>> brace matching indentation breaks…
>>>
>> Which pos? there are lots in brace_match, what about if pos-1 is
>> replaced by pos?
>>
> I'm talking about this code chunk:
>
> chAtPos = sci_get_char_at(sci, pos - 1);
> styAtPos = sci_get_style_at(sci, pos);
>
> And I doubt that simply using pos and not pos-1 would fix the problem,
> even if it'd probably be less hackish not to use pos-1 (which might even
> become -1 if I read this right).

Yes, I think it can, presumably sci_get_char_at checks the position is
in range and doesn't crash.

In general I don't understand how it works, it uses the style from the
newly inserted brace to look for the match, but AFAICT it is called
before the brace is styled.

>>>>> And now the unique question (not that urgent since the patch isn't ready):
>>>>> how to add this as part of the auto-indentation? (I mean, always enable it
>>>>> -- I don't think everybody will like --, add a new indent method, a new
>>>>> separated setting, or what?)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> I think it needs to be a separate setting, parentheses indent mode
>>>>
>>>>
>>> You mean a complete setting like the indent mode (with different levels,
>>> etc) or simply a kinda boolean setting like "auto-indent parentheses"?
>>> Maybe a complex setting might be interesting to allow not only
>>> alignment, but also Geany-style of extra-indentation that isn't
>>> alignment and even other if somebody needs it.
>>>
>>>
>> I was thinking something similar to the brace matching settings for
>> the reasons you give below.  There is plenty of room in that page of
>> the prefs dialog.  Of course with my GUI record Enrico is sure to
>> disgree :D
>>
> Let's wait for other thoughts then ^^
>
>>> Ah, and there is another thing I would have to improve bracket matching
>>> indentation when the opening one is indented because of an alignment:
>>> backward parentheses matching after bracket matching. This would fix
>>> indentation of something like:
>>> if (a &&
>>> b) {
>>> /* code */
>>> }
>>> which currently result to:
>>> if (a &&
>>> b) {
>>> /* code */
>>> }
>>>
>> Sadly this example came through the email without any indentation at
>> all so I'm not sure what you mean.
>>
> Oh, sorry. with s/ /_/g, it is:
>
> if (a &&
> ____b) {
> __/* code */
> }
>
> results to:
>
> if (a &&
> ____b) {
> __/* code */
> ____}
>
> ...the closing bracket is aligned with the indentation of the maching opening one, but here it isn't indentation but alignment; then it breaks.

I see what you mean, that would be *very* annoying, but not easy to fix.

>
>>> which is obviously wrong here. I mean that the bracket is first matched,
>>> and then if there is a non-balanced parenthesis, it is matched to
>>> finally get the indentation. Well, of course it's probably not enough in
>>> some cases an/or languages, but it would probably fix the majority of
>>> scenario.
>>> Not sure if it should be completely related to parentheses
>>> auto-indentation and/or matching, or if it should be part of a sort of
>>> "intelligent detection of alignment vs. indentation".
>>>
>>> Anyway, I join an updated patch that seems to work very well (at least
>>> for me), thanks to is_code_style()! It still misses settings, and I
>>> would like to know your thoughts about what should depend on which
>>> setting (there's FIXME in the patch for them); and even how you'd like
>>> to see it in the preference dialogue.
>>>
>>>
>> I don't have a chance just now but will as soon as possible, I like
>> the idea of assisted function parameter indentation.
> Cool, I'm not alone! :D
>
> Regards,
> Colomban
>
> _______________________________________________
> Geany-devel mailing list
> Geany-devel at uvena.de
> http://lists.uvena.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geany-devel
>