From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: quimby.gnus.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Should invisible imply intangible? Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 14:58:07 -0700 (MST) Message-ID: <200203052158.g25Lw7A01243@wijiji.santafe.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.g24NfiH00596@aztec.santafe.edu> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: quimby2.netfonds.no X-Trace: quimby2.netfonds.no 1015366040 12693 195.204.10.66 (5 Mar 2002 22:07:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@quimby2.netfonds.no NNTP-Posting-Date: 5 Mar 2002 22:07:20 GMT Cc: 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 16iN5b-0003Id-00 for ; Tue, 05 Mar 2002 23:07:19 +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 16iMyj-0005pP-00; Tue, 05 Mar 2002 17:00:13 -0500 Original-Received: from pele.santafe.edu ([192.12.12.119]) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 16iMwj-0005WF-00; Tue, 05 Mar 2002 16:58:09 -0500 Original-Received: from wijiji.santafe.edu (wijiji [192.12.12.5]) by pele.santafe.edu (8.11.6+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id g25LwGu27963; Tue, 5 Mar 2002 14:58:16 -0700 (MST) Original-Received: (from rms@localhost) by wijiji.santafe.edu (8.11.6+Sun/8.9.3) id g25Lw7A01243; Tue, 5 Mar 2002 14:58:07 -0700 (MST) X-Authentication-Warning: wijiji.santafe.edu: rms set sender to rms@wijiji using -f Original-to: monnier+gnu/emacs@rum.cs.yale.edu In-reply-to: <200203042341.g24NfiH00596@aztec.santafe.edu> (message from Richard Stallman on Mon, 4 Mar 2002 16:41:44 -0700 (MST)) 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:1752 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:1752 I wrote The change in adjust_point_for_property seems ok, and it might solve this problem. However, subsequently I realized it should be somewhat different. The buffer position just after the invisible text should be treated as part of the range where point cannot be. (This is how invisible, intangible text is handled now.) _______________________________________________ Emacs-devel mailing list Emacs-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel