[erlang-questions] erlang emacs mode question
Wed Dec 16 03:54:15 CET 2009
I'm glad the default mode is now getting some love. Going forward,
I think it would be best to combine efforts and avoid a separate
fork if possible, it's just easier for everyone that way. It sounds
like the main remaining difference is the skeletons? Is there any
plan to roll the erlware skeletons into the main version? And did
you also incorporate flymake support? That's really quite handy.
Logan, Martin wrote:
> :-) Well I am glad that the regular mode benefited from it. The thanks for the Erlware mode really goes out to Dave Peticolas who owns it and maintains it quite well. He has added quite a lot of new support for things like flymake and a bunch of other cool stuff which does not spring to mind right now.
> Perhaps there is a way we can collaborate more actively now with Erlang up on github as you say.
> P.S I will take that "owe me one" in the form of a beer next year at EUC ;-)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dan Gudmundsson [mailto:]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 2:32 AM
> To: Logan, Martin
> Subject: Re: [erlang-questions] erlang emacs mode question
> Hi Martin
> I guess you haven't tested the new erlang mode either :-)
> or have you incorporated the fixes we have done?
> I used the erlware version myself before Kenneth hit me hard and told
> me to fix our version and apply the patches we had received.
> The one thing I miss is the edoc skeltons which you have and that you broke
> out the skeletons to a separate file.
> I don't use distel either so maybe your variant works better with that.
> But I have "stolen" some of the fixes you had and done many more and added
> several large patches from Anders Dahlin and Tomas Abrahamsson into
> which I think
> is a better version.
> Hopefully now with erlang on github we can join our efforts again, so
> that we can
> get the best of the two things. I know that our support of the emacs
> mode havn't been
> the best and when time is tight the emacs mode get down prioritized.
> It will probably happen again but now with erlang on github available
> it should be easier to
> apply the improvements the community makes.
> Cheers (I think I owe you one)
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 11:28 PM, Logan, Martin <> wrote:
>> BTW, the erlware erlang mode "erlware-mode" is much better than the erlang
>> mode. Many bugs have been fixed and the skeletons are all edoc'd. It has
>> been well maintained for over 2 years and is now way ahead IMHO. You can
>> find it at erlware.org or over at the google code site
>> On 12/14/09 10:36 AM, "Göran Båge" <> wrote:
>> Thanks Dan,
>> Yes it worked in R13B03, adding '%% ' and removing '%% '. Just my kind
>> of timing bringing it up just when it was fixed, it's been bugging me for
>> quite some time before I got around to asking:-). We are very slow
>> moving to new releases as we have long lived products running out there,
>> we still have some R9 based ones and I've not run R13 before, just installed
>> it as a matter of fact.
>> Dan Gudmundsson wrote:
>>> On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 4:56 PM, Göran Båge<>
>>>> Is there a reason why the erlang emacs mode treats comment (^C^C) and
>>>> (^C^U) asymmetrical, comment adds '%% ' and uncomment removes '%'. Pretty
>>>> annoying if you ask me (but who would even think of doing that :-). It
>>>> to work by adding only '%' earlier (maybe very much earlier like in R9 or
>>> Have you tried the latest erlang mode, on github or in R13B03?
>>> Both ^U^C^C and ^C^U works for me.
>>> PS: There are a lot of changes in the latest release of the erlang emacs
>>> so if we broke something please report or even better post a
>> -- Goran
>> --------------------- May the Snow be with you --------
>> Goran Bage MobileArts www.mobilearts.se
>> Tjarhovsgatan 56 SE-116 28 STOCKHOLM Sweden
>> phone: +46 733 358405
>> erlang-questions mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html
>> erlang-questions (at) erlang.org
More information about the erlang-questions