From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Nested display strings Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2011 09:17:12 +0300 Message-ID: <83aafgb2c7.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83k4ekc3z1.fsf@gnu.org> <8762q4mdjp.fsf@maru.md5i.com> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1303625841 19542 80.91.229.12 (24 Apr 2011 06:17:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2011 06:17:21 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Michael Welsh Duggan Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Apr 24 08:17:17 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QDsdA-0000nw-IA for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 24 Apr 2011 08:17:16 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:46285 helo=lists2.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QDsd9-0003Hh-MU for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 24 Apr 2011 02:17:15 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:51763) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QDsd7-0003Hc-F5 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 24 Apr 2011 02:17:14 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QDsd6-0004iJ-A4 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 24 Apr 2011 02:17:13 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout21.012.net.il ([80.179.55.169]:42129) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QDsd6-0004iF-2W for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 24 Apr 2011 02:17:12 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout21.012.net.il by a-mtaout21.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0LK500K0080K2V00@a-mtaout21.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 24 Apr 2011 09:17:10 +0300 (IDT) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.127.55.52]) by a-mtaout21.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0LK500KIE84L1340@a-mtaout21.012.net.il>; Sun, 24 Apr 2011 09:17:10 +0300 (IDT) In-reply-to: <8762q4mdjp.fsf@maru.md5i.com> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-Received-From: 80.179.55.169 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:138673 Archived-At: > From: Michael Welsh Duggan > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2011 01:19:38 -0400 > > I'm of the opinion that it should either display: STRING1 or > STRING1STRING2STRING1, and which doesn't really matter. That is, you think that doing that without setting priorities invokes "undefined behavior". > If I had to choose, however, I would prefer that if two overlays > with the same priority appear over the same character, whichever > overlay that has the earlier start should take precedence (giving us > STRING1 in this case). I tend to agree. > Please note, that if myov1 had a specifically higher priority than > myov2, I think STRING1STRING2STRING1 is a perfectly valid result. You mean, if myov2 has higher priority, right? Because if myov1 has higher priority, we display just STRING1, as expected.