From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: quimby.gnus.org!not-for-mail From: "Stefan Monnier" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Should invisible imply intangible? Date: Mon, 04 Mar 2002 18:46:23 -0500 Message-ID: <200203042346.g24NkNs30194@rum.cs.yale.edu> References: <200202232019.g1NKJoG14638@aztec.santafe.edu> <200202250510.g1P5A3714156@rum.cs.yale.edu> <200202262013.g1QKDef16683@aztec.santafe.edu> <200203010130.g211UDG05790@rum.cs.yale.edu> <200203031440.g23EeN200619@aztec.santafe.edu> <200203031711.g23HBI623254@rum.cs.yale.edu> <200203042341.g24Nffq00590@aztec.santafe.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: quimby2.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: quimby2.netfonds.no 1015286081 24139 195.204.10.66 (4 Mar 2002 23:54:41 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@quimby2.netfonds.no NNTP-Posting-Date: 4 Mar 2002 23:54:41 GMT Cc: monnier+gnu/emacs@rum.cs.yale.edu, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by quimby2.netfonds.no with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 16i2Hw-0006HE-00 for ; Tue, 05 Mar 2002 00:54:40 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 16i2BZ-0008Ia-00; Mon, 04 Mar 2002 18:48:05 -0500 Original-Received: from rum.cs.yale.edu ([128.36.229.169]) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 16i29w-0008AW-00; Mon, 04 Mar 2002 18:46:24 -0500 Original-Received: (from monnier@localhost) by rum.cs.yale.edu (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g24NkNs30194; Mon, 4 Mar 2002 18:46:23 -0500 X-Mailer: exmh version 2.4 06/23/2000 with nmh-1.0.4 Original-To: Richard Stallman Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.5 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: quimby.gnus.org gmane.emacs.devel:1730 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:1730 > > Also, as David Kastrup has mentioned repeatedly, intangible text tends > > to break lots of things... > > > > I don't think so. > > Please, Richard, try to remember the lengthy discussion we've had about that. > > You seem to agree with my conclusion: > > In practice, it's generally a non-issue because most uses of intangible > text are restricted to a particular context so that this intangible > text is only accessed by a small body of elisp code. I indeed agree as long as intangible stays as a rarely used feature. OTOH If you turn invisible text into intangible text as well, then the problem changes since it is not true any more that "most uses of intangible text are restricted to a particular context". Stefan _______________________________________________ Emacs-devel mailing list Emacs-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel