* bug#5312: Why is ‘show-trailing-whitespace’ considered unsafe? @ 2010-01-04 13:11 ` Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s 2010-01-05 18:56 ` Stefan Monnier 2010-01-14 6:16 ` bug#5312: marked as done (Why is ‘show-trailing-whitespace’ considered unsafe?) Emacs bug Tracking System 0 siblings, 2 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s @ 2010-01-04 13:11 UTC (permalink / raw) To: bug-emacs Hello, and best wishes, Why is ‘show-trailing-whitespace’ considered unsafe? I find it inconvenient since adding it to a per-file or per-directory local variable list will (by default) ask users whether they want to apply the dreaded setting. Thanks, Ludo’. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* bug#5312: Why is ‘show-trailing-whitespace’ considered unsafe? 2010-01-04 13:11 ` bug#5312: Why is ‘show-trailing-whitespace’ considered unsafe? Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s @ 2010-01-05 18:56 ` Stefan Monnier 2010-01-06 8:31 ` Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s 2010-01-14 6:16 ` bug#5312: marked as done (Why is ‘show-trailing-whitespace’ considered unsafe?) Emacs bug Tracking System 1 sibling, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Stefan Monnier @ 2010-01-05 18:56 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s; +Cc: ?=, 5312 > Why is ‘show-trailing-whitespace’ considered unsafe? Because all vars are unsafe by default (i.e. unless someone tells Emacs explicitly that this var is safe). > I find it inconvenient since adding it to a per-file or per-directory > local variable list will (by default) ask users whether they want to > apply the dreaded setting. Arguably this var is more a personal user preference than a property of a file, so maybe the lack of a `safe-local-variable' property is actually a feature ;-0 Stefan ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* bug#5312: Why is ‘show-trailing-whitespace’ considered unsafe? 2010-01-05 18:56 ` Stefan Monnier @ 2010-01-06 8:31 ` Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s 2010-01-06 14:24 ` Stefan Monnier 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s @ 2010-01-06 8:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Stefan Monnier; +Cc: 5312 Hi, [There was a bug in the Cc: list.] Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes: >> I find it inconvenient since adding it to a per-file or per-directory >> local variable list will (by default) ask users whether they want to >> apply the dreaded setting. > > Arguably this var is more a personal user preference than a property of > a file, so maybe the lack of a `safe-local-variable' property is > actually a feature ;-0 Yeah, I see what you mean. OTOH the same could be said of, say, ‘indent-tabs-mode’, which /is/ safe. I don’t find ‘show-trailing-whitespace’ any different. Thanks, Ludo’. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* bug#5312: Why is ‘show-trailing-whitespace’ considered unsafe? 2010-01-06 8:31 ` Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s @ 2010-01-06 14:24 ` Stefan Monnier 2010-01-06 15:13 ` Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s 2010-01-06 19:33 ` James Cloos 0 siblings, 2 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Stefan Monnier @ 2010-01-06 14:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s; +Cc: 5312 >>> I find it inconvenient since adding it to a per-file or per-directory >>> local variable list will (by default) ask users whether they want to >>> apply the dreaded setting. >> Arguably this var is more a personal user preference than a property of >> a file, so maybe the lack of a `safe-local-variable' property is >> actually a feature ;-0 > Yeah, I see what you mean. OTOH the same could be said of, say, > ‘indent-tabs-mode’, which /is/ safe. I don’t find > ‘show-trailing-whitespace’ any different. You might be right. But I do know of several file formats where TABs are seriously problematic so you could argue that indent-tabs-mode in those files is linked to the file's content rather than some mere user preference. Of course, maybe you can come up with file formats where trailing whitespaces are seriously problematic as well. I just can't think of any off the top of my head. Stefan ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* bug#5312: Why is ‘show-trailing-whitespace’ considered unsafe? 2010-01-06 14:24 ` Stefan Monnier @ 2010-01-06 15:13 ` Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s 2010-01-06 19:33 ` James Cloos 1 sibling, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s @ 2010-01-06 15:13 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Stefan Monnier; +Cc: 5312 Hi, Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes: > Of course, maybe you can come up with file formats where trailing > whitespaces are seriously problematic as well. I just can't think of > any off the top of my head. Trailing whitespaces can lead to pointless conflicts when applying patches. See, e.g., http://www.mail-archive.com/libvir-list@redhat.com/msg04896.html . In this thread, the project’s policy is to get rid of them, and ‘show-trailing-whitespace’ in ‘.dir-locals.el’ or similar would definitely help. Thanks, Ludo’. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* bug#5312: Why is ‘show-trailing-whitespace’ considered unsafe? 2010-01-06 14:24 ` Stefan Monnier 2010-01-06 15:13 ` Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s @ 2010-01-06 19:33 ` James Cloos 2010-01-06 20:25 ` Stefan Monnier 1 sibling, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: James Cloos @ 2010-01-06 19:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: 5312 >>>>> "Stefan" == Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes: Stefan> Of course, maybe you can come up with file formats where trailing Stefan> whitespaces are seriously problematic as well. I just can't think Stefan> of any off the top of my head. One seen recently -- on the groff list, IIRC -- involved continuation lines. <\><NL> works, <\><SP><NL> does not. -JimC -- James Cloos <cloos@jhcloos.com> OpenPGP: 1024D/ED7DAEA6 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* bug#5312: Why is ‘show-trailing-whitespace’ considered unsafe? 2010-01-06 19:33 ` James Cloos @ 2010-01-06 20:25 ` Stefan Monnier 2010-01-07 14:17 ` Kevin Rodgers 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Stefan Monnier @ 2010-01-06 20:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: James Cloos; +Cc: 5312 Stefan> Of course, maybe you can come up with file formats where trailing Stefan> whitespaces are seriously problematic as well. I just can't think Stefan> of any off the top of my head. > One seen recently -- on the groff list, IIRC -- involved continuation > lines. <\><NL> works, <\><SP><NL> does not. That also affects C, C++, Elisp, and many other formats. The fact that we haven't mentioned them indicates that it's not considered "seriously problematic" enough. Actually, font-lock can also be used in those modes to highlight such suspicious forms: it's more useful than show-trailing-whitespace since it can more specifically target those trailing whitespaces that are semantically significant. Stefan ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* bug#5312: Why is ‘show-trailing-whitespace’ considered unsafe? 2010-01-06 20:25 ` Stefan Monnier @ 2010-01-07 14:17 ` Kevin Rodgers 2010-01-07 19:40 ` Stefan Monnier 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Kevin Rodgers @ 2010-01-07 14:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: bug-gnu-emacs Stefan Monnier wrote: > Stefan> Of course, maybe you can come up with file formats where trailing > Stefan> whitespaces are seriously problematic as well. I just can't think > Stefan> of any off the top of my head. > >> One seen recently -- on the groff list, IIRC -- involved continuation >> lines. <\><NL> works, <\><SP><NL> does not. > > That also affects C, C++, Elisp, and many other formats. The fact that we > haven't mentioned them indicates that it's not considered "seriously > problematic" enough. > Actually, font-lock can also be used in those modes to highlight such > suspicious forms: it's more useful than show-trailing-whitespace since > it can more specifically target those trailing whitespaces that are > semantically significant. Regardless, show-trailing-whitespace is safe. -- Kevin Rodgers Denver, Colorado, USA ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* bug#5312: Why is ‘show-trailing-whitespace’ considered unsafe? 2010-01-07 14:17 ` Kevin Rodgers @ 2010-01-07 19:40 ` Stefan Monnier 0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Stefan Monnier @ 2010-01-07 19:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Kevin Rodgers; +Cc: 5312 > Regardless, show-trailing-whitespace is safe. Agreed, Stefan ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* bug#5312: marked as done (Why is ‘show-trailing-whitespace’ considered unsafe?) 2010-01-04 13:11 ` bug#5312: Why is ‘show-trailing-whitespace’ considered unsafe? Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s 2010-01-05 18:56 ` Stefan Monnier @ 2010-01-14 6:16 ` Emacs bug Tracking System 1 sibling, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Emacs bug Tracking System @ 2010-01-14 6:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Glenn Morris; +Cc: emacs-bug-tracker [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 875 bytes --] Your message dated Thu, 14 Jan 2010 01:15:33 -0500 with message-id <117hrlp5yy.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> and subject line Re: bug#5312: Why is ‘show-trailing-whitespace’ considered unsafe? has caused the Emacs bug report #5312, regarding Why is ‘show-trailing-whitespace’ considered unsafe? to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org immediately.) -- 5312: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=5312 Emacs Bug Tracking System Contact bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org with problems [-- Attachment #2: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 5094 bytes --] From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) To: bug-emacs@gnu.org Subject: Why is ‘show-trailing-whitespace’ considered unsafe? Date: Mon, 04 Jan 2010 14:11:29 +0100 Message-ID: <87vdfiqake.fsf@gnu.org> Hello, and best wishes, Why is ‘show-trailing-whitespace’ considered unsafe? I find it inconvenient since adding it to a per-file or per-directory local variable list will (by default) ask users whether they want to apply the dreaded setting. Thanks, Ludo’. [-- Attachment #3: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 2536 bytes --] From: Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org> To: 5312-done@debbugs.gnu.org Subject: Re: bug#5312: Why is ‘show-trailing-whitespace’ considered unsafe? Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 01:15:33 -0500 Message-ID: <117hrlp5yy.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> * frame.el (show-trailing-whitespace): Safe if boolean. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2010-01-14 6:16 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <117hrlp5yy.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org>
2010-01-04 13:11 ` bug#5312: Why is ‘show-trailing-whitespace’ considered unsafe? Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s
2010-01-05 18:56 ` Stefan Monnier
2010-01-06 8:31 ` Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s
2010-01-06 14:24 ` Stefan Monnier
2010-01-06 15:13 ` Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s
2010-01-06 19:33 ` James Cloos
2010-01-06 20:25 ` Stefan Monnier
2010-01-07 14:17 ` Kevin Rodgers
2010-01-07 19:40 ` Stefan Monnier
2010-01-14 6:16 ` bug#5312: marked as done (Why is ‘show-trailing-whitespace’ considered unsafe?) Emacs bug Tracking System
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).