From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: emacs rendering comparisson between emacs23 and emacs26.3 Date: Wed, 08 Apr 2020 12:44:59 +0300 Message-ID: <83tv1upazo.fsf@gnu.org> References: <679ab47b-6e3e-65e6-f955-be58d59ed092@yandex.ru> <83sghhss8v.fsf@gnu.org> <671b5b41-663d-5ab9-f022-dc6c5ce54dd0@yandex.ru> <83r1x1sqkx.fsf@gnu.org> <83lfn9s63n.fsf@gnu.org> <83h7xvqsgc.fsf@gnu.org> <90749329-ccb1-f96e-29c0-b4ecbb81d1d4@yandex.ru> <837dyrqews.fsf@gnu.org> <20200407201018.GD4009@ACM> <835zeaqz8q.fsf@gnu.org> <66e2602a-0ab6-3f27-1c4d-de8221dcccdb@gmx.at> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="120381"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: acm@muc.de, rrandresf@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, rms@gnu.org, dgutov@yandex.ru To: martin rudalics Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Apr 08 11:50:47 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jM7M7-000VC0-4o for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 08 Apr 2020 11:50:47 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:33492 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jM7M5-00024s-7o for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 08 Apr 2020 05:50:45 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:41929) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jM7Go-0006Vu-HV for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 08 Apr 2020 05:45:20 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:49941) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jM7Gm-0003JB-F9; Wed, 08 Apr 2020 05:45:16 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=4370 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1jM7GW-0008SB-Tx; Wed, 08 Apr 2020 05:45:01 -0400 In-Reply-To: <66e2602a-0ab6-3f27-1c4d-de8221dcccdb@gmx.at> (message from martin rudalics on Wed, 8 Apr 2020 10:38:30 +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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:246656 Archived-At: > Cc: dgutov@yandex.ru, rrandresf@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, rms@gnu.org > From: martin rudalics > Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2020 10:38:30 +0200 > > What's bothering me more is that when I put an overlay somewhere in a > buffer and eventually remove it, underlying text properties provided by > the font locking mechanism are never restored unless I explicitly edit > the line where such properties should be seen. Apparently so, because > font locking does not trigger when overlays get removed because that > does not count as a buffer change. Overlay changes do count as buffer changes, for the purposes of redisplay, so a bug report with a recipe will be appreciated.