Hi Barry,
trying to keep some experimental implementations synced
semantically, I'm stumbling about the following:
py-goto-block-up (&optional nomark)
"Move up to start of current block.
Go to the statement that starts the smallest enclosing block; roughly
speaking, this will be the closest pr
On 4/16/2010 5:27 AM, Andreas Roehler wrote:
Hi Barry,
trying to keep some experimental implementations synced
semantically, I'm stumbling about the following:
py-goto-block-up (&optional nomark)
"Move up to start of current block.
Go to the statement that starts the smallest enclosing bloc
Hi,
After passing some time comparing how python-mode.el and python.el create
the Python interpreter, I figured out that if I (setq
process-connection-type nil) in python-mode-hook, then everything work fine.
Marc
On Sat, Apr 3, 2010 at 5:28 AM, Andreas Roehler
wrote:
> Marc Massar wrote:
> >
On Apr 16, 2010, at 11:27 AM, Andreas Roehler wrote:
>trying to keep some experimental implementations synced
>semantically, I'm stumbling about the following:
>
>py-goto-block-up (&optional nomark)
> "Move up to start of current block.
>Go to the statement that starts the smallest enclosing bloc
On 4/16/2010 2:28 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
On Apr 16, 2010, at 10:03 AM, Eric S. Johansson wrote:
I dunno. If it's useful to people sure, but I doubt I'd use them much.
Sometimes it's just quicker to use C-n and C-p y'know? :)
well duh, if you have working hands it certainly is easier. like
