You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
These commands move point or set up the region based on top-level
major definitions, also called “defuns”.
(emacs) Moving by Defuns
In interactive programming jupyter-eval-defun (or whatever method
you use) should eval the current top-level construct. This may be a
function but could also be a type definition or whatever. *-eval-defun relies on beginning-/end-of-defun.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
This is often not the case, eg. python-mode. But, the beg/end-of-defun
functions are buggy
Is there some consensus how these function should behave? IMHO `C-M-x`
should work as expected with `function`, `macro`, and `struct`. But
this could also be fixed in `*-eval-defun`.
I agree with you about -*eval-defun. I don't think there is a general consensus on the beg/end-of-defun functions with respect to nested functions? I just ported python's implementation given the language similarities (although it is obviously buggy, I just haven't been using Julia for a while so haven't been inclined to fix it).
The Emacs manual is quite clear about this:
(emacs) Moving by Defuns
In interactive programming
jupyter-eval-defun
(or whatever methodyou use) should eval the current top-level construct. This may be a
function but could also be a type definition or whatever.
*-eval-defun
relies onbeginning-/end-of-defun
.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: