From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Question about display engine Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2019 16:59:54 +0300 Message-ID: <835zn7bvvp.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20190807005411.qfzzpz5cjrajbwn2@Ergus> <83o911aukn.fsf@gnu.org> <20190807153220.ssijgjxnf6dszz45@Ergus> <83k1bpasic.fsf@gnu.org> <20190807155738.yviofsumjjhqueci@Ergus> <83imr9ar9f.fsf@gnu.org> <0975890b-37b4-428d-f6e5-5dcf894fb6be@gmx.at> <83ftmdapxm.fsf@gnu.org> <20190808083804.ta3evocyb4hirywj@Ergus> Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="52686"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" Cc: spacibba@aol.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: martin rudalics Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Aug 08 16:00:39 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hviy5-000DIf-4i for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 08 Aug 2019 16:00:37 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51986 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hviy4-0005s8-2c for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 08 Aug 2019 10:00:36 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:58710) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hvixX-0005Cp-3f for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Aug 2019 10:00:08 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:34822) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hvixV-0001SI-S0; Thu, 08 Aug 2019 10:00:01 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=4269 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1hvixV-0006c7-6k; Thu, 08 Aug 2019 10:00:01 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from martin rudalics on Thu, 8 Aug 2019 15:05:37 +0200) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:239251 Archived-At: > Cc: Eli Zaretskii > From: martin rudalics > Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 15:05:37 +0200 > > > Yes, that's exactly the point. The only face I see that needs to be > > extended so far is the region. If only the region is extended > > (assuming we won't stop extending that one too) you won't need your > > workarounds, extra settings, another flag in the face structure, or > > call extend face to end of line most of the time. > > I'm afraid things are not that simple. We have at least the secondary > selection and 'hl-line-mode' to take care of. Indeed, nothing is ever as simple in the display code, due to the sheer amount of different use cases. I think at least one other face attribute that's special in this regard is :box, in particular (but not only) because extend_face_to_end_of_line is called from the function which redisplays the mode line and the header line. > Moreover, there might be users who do prefer the current way of > extending (and not extending) faces to window edges. And I have no > idea whether image or rectangular regions require special treatment > too. Yes, I think we will have to provide some backward compatibility shims for these and other use cases.