Never mind, since get_pos_property is a C function and not a Lisp one this probably wouldn't work. On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 9:47 AM, Nathaniel Flath wrote: > > > On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 4:55 PM, Stefan Monnier wrote: > >> > Since the main point I was implementing this was so I could add these >> > properties to overlay, I'd prefer a solution that works better with >> them. >> >> Yes, I understand that, and I agree it should work well with overlays >> as well. >> >> > Would it be better to store overlays at point at the end of this loop, >> and >> > use this instead of looking up old points? >> >> Might be, yes. >> >> > To solve the boundary-control issue, I could look at get-pos-property >> > and use the same mechanism it does for controlling boundary behaviour. >> >> Yes, you'd need to implement a get-overlays-at-pos. >> Stefan >> > Actually, instead of this, why not add an extra optional argument that > defaults to nil to get-pos-property? If the argument is non-nil, > get-pos-property would return a list of the values named property at pos > instead of just one of them. This way wouldn't duplicate boundary-checking > functionality. > > Thanks, > Nathaniel Flath >