From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: James N. V. Cash Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [PATCH] Handle case where `beg` and `end` are strings instead of markers Date: Wed, 04 May 2022 08:08:07 -0400 Message-ID: <87pmkt1owo.fsf@occasionallycogent.com> References: <87k0b84tfr.fsf@occasionallycogent.com> <87h76c4ruf.fsf@occasionallycogent.com> <86sfpwwerz.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <87czh03xa9.fsf@occasionallycogent.com> <87o80i3frf.fsf@occasionallycogent.com> <87ee1e374d.fsf@occasionallycogent.com> <861qxdf7pl.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <87wnf40x29.fsf@occasionallycogent.com> <86wnf3oi4e.fsf@mail.linkov.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="31237"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Stefan Monnier , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Juri Linkov Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed May 04 14:10:01 2022 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 1nmDpR-0007wa-60 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 04 May 2022 14:10:01 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:40412 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nmDpP-0005a2-S9 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 04 May 2022 08:09:59 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:34334) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nmDni-0002Pi-Bk for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 04 May 2022 08:08:14 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-qk1-f180.google.com ([209.85.222.180]:39652) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nmDng-00035r-OA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 04 May 2022 08:08:13 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-qk1-f180.google.com with SMTP id b20so752087qkc.6 for ; Wed, 04 May 2022 05:08:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:mime-version; bh=9r37L0kL1tfGfDoRnUgVSo9yMc0flBfhtl4lj4ceqk4=; b=oXeRyiC7I3wj6583ztjcZmMBZSIEpS+KV43GUAIIp3UIAycaHiiKPeSiL9f4LK5AaA B4oUw5N5pjj0xa1esTmkfikenvExu+oRyyZPG7+bDsvI0nzkE8Pjeksgi1Hx6u7BQZXv D1RV7HCWHdEi1pXiw+WFzymsTo7brFIu1+JLHY5kXKh3ImMTPAvfcWBPYEVSwVhGwwZ9 k2zJZvR2+okE5k66QMv/SWzkGCjtUXgbvSschXb1qdVVtYgX624JG3lotkYY7/BygxxP NU2JVNm01ngVIXzgulKM0Py7jSBtXa+E3CO7BM47dS7epz0x980Gs28L3FgfZmUwUO86 l3tg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533Nys2/m2X+x4A0tTlS/TgvVSOV95YbAc8573GS3Xc44MC+g567 bctWldJ79kDw4HDLIuHAKrMLowdEsxg= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz8wDUblQDyAosZdSe5GMaXXWy0rgi3jFVqjFo9H0s1cT49Gn1BwHIOBWSVD0nQArz9ja2L8g== X-Received: by 2002:ae9:ed48:0:b0:69f:bae5:8adf with SMTP id c69-20020ae9ed48000000b0069fbae58adfmr15883959qkg.138.1651666090988; Wed, 04 May 2022 05:08:10 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from auth1-smtp.messagingengine.com (auth1-smtp.messagingengine.com. [66.111.4.227]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id y189-20020a37afc6000000b0069fd84bc14csm5362190qke.122.2022.05.04.05.08.09 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 04 May 2022 05:08:09 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from compute5.internal (compute5.nyi.internal [10.202.2.45]) by mailauth.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72D5D27C0054; Wed, 4 May 2022 08:08:09 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute5.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 04 May 2022 08:08:09 -0400 X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvfedrvdelgdegkecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpefhvfevufgjfhffkfggtgesthdtredttddttdenucfhrhhomheplfgrmhgvshcu pfdrucggrdcuvegrshhhuceojhgrmhgvshdrnhhvtgesghhmrghilhdrtghomheqnecugg ftrfgrthhtvghrnhepudehtdeukeekiedvfeekudefkeeileejgeehfffhieevuefhkeeu ffefgfeileeknecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrh homhepjhgrmhgvshgptggrshhhodhmvghsmhhtphgruhhthhhpvghrshhonhgrlhhithih qdduvdefvddtvdejledvqddvjeekgedtudehvddqjhgrmhgvshdrnhhvtgeppehgmhgrih hlrdgtohhmsehotggtrghsihhonhgrlhhlhigtohhgvghnthdrtghomh X-ME-Proxy: Original-Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Wed, 4 May 2022 08:08:08 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <86wnf3oi4e.fsf@mail.linkov.net> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.222.180; envelope-from=james.nvc@gmail.com; helo=mail-qk1-f180.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -9 X-Spam_score: -1.0 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.0 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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:289163 Archived-At: Juri Linkov writes: >> The other approach, which the below patch implements, is try to find the >> bounds based on the strings, but if the contents been edited, find the >> nearest CRM separator. This is kind of nice in that it lets you edit >> other selections but then still select a candidate, but I don't know how >> useful/expected that really is. The logic could also be made somewhat >> more complex (count the number of separators in `start` and `end`, try >> to guess how many we should skip over in each direction) but I don't >> know if that's really worthwhile. > > I tried out this approach and it works nicely, except the case > when the CRM separator gets deleted by the user. But OTOH, > the user might want to delete the separator intentionally, > to reduce the number of selections. So it seems there is no need > to make the logic more complex. Should I make a new thread with this patch then, or is the one here okay?