From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Stefan Monnier" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Should invisible imply intangible? Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 11:53:31 -0500 Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <200203131653.g2DGrVQ24761@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.g24NfiH00596@aztec.santafe.edu> <200203052158.g25Lw7A01243@wijiji.santafe.edu> <200203052304.g25N4pI03908@rum.cs.yale.edu> <200203092003.g29K3b303868@wijiji.santafe.edu> <200203092237.g29MbGf29464@rum.cs.yale.edu> <200203102132.g2ALWPK04119@wijiji.santafe.edu> <200203102202.g2AM26q06798@rum.cs.yale.edu> <200203111906.g2BJ6BY04591@wijiji.santafe.edu> <200203121756.g2CHuG514941@rum.cs.yale.edu> <200203131058.g2DAwQh05428@wijiji.santafe.edu> <200203131306.g2DD6Hk19277@rum.cs.yale.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1016038480 30854 127.0.0.1 (13 Mar 2002 16:54:40 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 16:54:40 +0000 (UTC) Cc: "Stefan Monnier" , Richard Stallman , emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 16lC1Q-00081Y-00 for ; Wed, 13 Mar 2002 17:54:40 +0100 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 16lC47-0007wF-00 for ; Wed, 13 Mar 2002 17:57:27 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 16lC1D-0004NJ-00; Wed, 13 Mar 2002 11:54:27 -0500 Original-Received: from rum.cs.yale.edu ([128.36.229.169]) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 16lC0L-0004Kl-00; Wed, 13 Mar 2002 11:53:33 -0500 Original-Received: (from monnier@localhost) by rum.cs.yale.edu (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g2DGrVQ24761; Wed, 13 Mar 2002 11:53:31 -0500 X-Mailer: exmh version 2.4 06/23/2000 with nmh-1.0.4 Original-To: David.Kastrup@t-online.de (David Kastrup) 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: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:1914 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:1914 > > > The text should be intangible when it is invisible, and not when > > > it is not. And none of that should require changing actual text > > > properties. > > > > Now it all makes a lot more sense, thank you. > > I guess that's the part of the beginning of the discussion that I missed. > > I'll see what code I can come up with, > > I don't think it appropriate to hack intangibility into the invisible > property just because intangibility happens to be missing an API that > invisibility has. > > It will do no harm if the user gets his cursor moved out of invisible > areas at command completion time (as is done with point adjustment), > but the semantics of the intangibility property are much more > severe. It violates a lot of assumptions a programmer might make > about how text behaves and should not be applied lightly. I understand that. When I say "intangible" I just mean that the cursor will be somehow moved outside of the area. When I mean intangibility as is implemented by the `intangible' property, I say it explicitly. I intend to provide the "invisible is intangible" by extending the point adjustment function, as in my previous patch. Stefan _______________________________________________ Emacs-devel mailing list Emacs-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel