[AC21.5R21.4] Tests for backward-up-list

APPROVE COMMIT 21.5 RECOMMEND 21.4 Index: tests/ChangeLog =================================================================== RCS file: /pack/xemacscvs/XEmacs/xemacs/tests/ChangeLog,v retrieving revision 1.73 diff -u -r1.73 ChangeLog --- tests/ChangeLog 29 Nov 2005 17:04:23 -0000 1.73 +++ tests/ChangeLog 8 Dec 2005 09:30:49 -0000 ＠＠ -0,0 +1,5 ＠＠ +2005-12-08 Stephen J. Turnbull <stephen(a)xemacs.org&gt; + + * automated/syntax-tests.el (backward-up-list): New test. + Thanks to Zacjev Evgeny for report, Aidan Kehoe for reproduction. + Index: tests/automated/syntax-tests.el =================================================================== RCS file: /pack/xemacscvs/XEmacs/xemacs/tests/automated/syntax-tests.el,v retrieving revision 1.5 diff -u -r1.5 syntax-tests.el --- tests/automated/syntax-tests.el 11 Nov 2002 15:39:07 -0000 1.5 +++ tests/automated/syntax-tests.el 8 Dec 2005 09:30:49 -0000 ＠＠ -150,3 +150,42 ＠＠ ;; this last used to crash (parse-partial-sexp point (point-max))))) + +;; Test backward-up-list +;; Known-Bug: report = Evgeny Zacjev ca 2005-12-01, confirm = Aidan Kehoe + +(with-temp-buffer + ;; We are now using the standard syntax table. Thus there's no need to + ;; worry about a bogus syntax setting, eg, in a Gnus Article buffer the + ;; bug doesn't manifest. + + ;; value of point to the immediate left of this character + ;; 0 1 2 + ;; 1234 56789 012 34567 890 12 3456 7 + (insert "a ( \"b (c\" (\"defg\") \")\") h\n") + + ;; #### This test should check *every* position. + (flet ((backward-up-list-moves-point-from-to (start expected-end) + (goto-char start) + (backward-up-list 1) + (= (point) expected-end))) + (Known-Bug-Expect-Failure + ;; Evgeny's case + (Assert (backward-up-list-moves-point-from-to 16 12))) + (Assert (backward-up-list-moves-point-from-to 19 12)) + (Assert (backward-up-list-moves-point-from-to 20 3)) + (Known-Bug-Expect-Failure + (Assert (backward-up-list-moves-point-from-to 22 3))) + (Known-Bug-Expect-Failure + (Assert (backward-up-list-moves-point-from-to 23 3))) + (Assert (backward-up-list-moves-point-from-to 24 3)) + ;; This is maybe a little tricky, since we don't expect the position + ;; check to happen -- so use an illegal expected position + ;; I don't think there's any other way for this to fail that way, + ;; barring hardware error.... + (Check-Error-Message syntax-error + "Unbalanced parentheses" + (backward-up-list-moves-point-from-to 25 nil)) + ;; special-case check that point didn't move + (Assert (= (point) 25)))) + -- School of Systems and Information Engineering http://turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp University of Tsukuba Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN Ask not how you can "do" free software business; ask what your business can "do for" free software.