From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ihor Radchenko Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#59067: 29.0.50; Exexpected overlay order in `overlays-in' return value Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2022 07:04:54 +0000 Message-ID: <878rkobm21.fsf@localhost> References: <871qqgn44l.fsf@localhost> <838rko38g6.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="21956"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: 59067@debbugs.gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Nov 06 08:05:17 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1orZiX-0005UE-DR for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 06 Nov 2022 08:05:17 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1orZiK-0000lm-75; Sun, 06 Nov 2022 02:05:04 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1orZiI-0000lW-W3 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 06 Nov 2022 02:05:03 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1orZiI-0005oz-MP for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 06 Nov 2022 02:05:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1orZiI-0000Sy-67 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 06 Nov 2022 02:05:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Ihor Radchenko Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2022 07:05:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 59067 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 59067-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B59067.16677182721752 (code B ref 59067); Sun, 06 Nov 2022 07:05:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 59067) by debbugs.gnu.org; 6 Nov 2022 07:04:32 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58582 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1orZhn-0000SB-S5 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 06 Nov 2022 02:04:32 -0500 Original-Received: from mout01.posteo.de ([185.67.36.65]:49069) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1orZhi-0000Ru-DD for 59067@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 06 Nov 2022 02:04:30 -0500 Original-Received: from submission (posteo.de [185.67.36.169]) by mout01.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 908D8240026 for <59067@debbugs.gnu.org>; Sun, 6 Nov 2022 08:04:18 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1667718260; bh=q36iIljOFkmXweZZ/dd3zd1rr+qP0G7JP3dCZIY32Rc=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:From; b=MJ0PmuUhWSFydrpJFziKClD4D8CoUEWfxWqhZPPQCaCdn6NqbGhtbiu1ZB0nRXzRf W+bXvbKTjPYhg1LHFBq1SryK6v+z+9Tx4FUfbS0I/T+1X8PtaAzgzxq5LSFMPjenHP R/AM7jABXivHWNYdwRBM0LisVnMr4JiL1dVFF3LVsHu+FgYWlF5bhU1G8nGT8jPDFX JX+qz4ivC097NDZQqa1W38dX3liw2W4trP7A2T/cZx4fqRiUXHAcDkYT7Z+rOA+i4g 4UDt58HQH16Rr107AmYnnXTNIpwWyY+ALzGPX6nrZNnUovijy/MXfOXbdBf+hBUL+V vU5nzCKdL7Jfw== Original-Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4N4lhw5q4Vz9rxR; Sun, 6 Nov 2022 08:04:15 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <838rko38g6.fsf@gnu.org> X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:247187 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> The common feature of all the failing tests is usage of overlays-in and >> expecting certain order of overlays in its return value. The order is >> changed compared to Emacs 28. >> >> I consider this an Emacs bug. > > I'm not sure we want to keep the old order (which AFAIU was the side > effect of the implementation), nor become committed to a specific > order. Sorting overlays is a slowdown, and not every application > cares about the order. The ones that do care can sort the overlays in > the order they want. > > Or maybe I'm missing something: can you explain why the order matters > in a couple of specific examples from Org? You are right. `overlays-in' docstring does not give any promises. It is not really a big deal for Org as well (can as well sort the return value). The only thing that could be useful on Emacs side is explicitly stating in the `overlays-in' docstring that overlay list may be in arbitrary order. -- Ihor Radchenko // yantar92, Org mode contributor, Learn more about Org mode at . Support Org development at , or support my work at