Hi Eric, David,
Thanks for the update. I will test it and let you know if it works.
On Feb 20, 2013, at 12:38 PM, David Engster wrote:
> Eric M. Ludlam writes:
>> On 02/10/2013 06:51 PM, Fedor Baart wrote:
>>> I noticed the following line in the semantic-f90.el:
>>> (modify-syntax-entry ?& " " f90-mode-syntax-table)
>>> This causes the & to be considered whitespace. This causes some issues
>>> if you cleanup trailing whitespace.
> Yes, I realize now this was a pretty stupid and dangerous idea.
>> You are right, there is a problem here. The f90 fortran parser for
>> Semantic explicitly changes the syntax table. I'm guessing it should
>> instead use the lexical syntax modification system instead.
>> I don't use fortran, nor would I know what to do with a fortran file,
>> but the attached patch is my guess as to how to resolve this issue.
>> It compiles and passes unit tests. Perhaps it will help fix your
> Oh, I didn't know semantic-lex-syntax-modifications. If the unit test
> passes, that's good. However, as far as I see I forgot to add a test
> with a continuation line, so Fedor, could you test if those lines are
> still parsed correctly?