From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: cursor doesn't show through transparent images in emacs 22, unlike emacs 21 Date: Sat, 09 Sep 2006 16:45:38 -0400 Message-ID: References: <851wqpgxtp.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <85ejuojey3.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1157834802 12388 80.91.229.2 (9 Sep 2006 20:46:42 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2006 20:46:42 +0000 (UTC) Cc: juri@jurta.org, ken.manheimer@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, storm@cua.dk Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Sep 09 22:46:40 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GM9ip-0005m6-8I for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 09 Sep 2006 22:46:39 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GM9io-0002UP-Cr for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 09 Sep 2006 16:46:38 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GM9hs-0001l9-4J for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 09 Sep 2006 16:45:40 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GM9hr-0001kl-EI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 09 Sep 2006 16:45:39 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GM9hr-0001ke-4r for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 09 Sep 2006 16:45:39 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1GM9ik-0004yS-La for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 09 Sep 2006 16:46:34 -0400 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.34) id 1GM9hq-0003H6-33; Sat, 09 Sep 2006 16:45:38 -0400 Original-To: David Kastrup In-reply-to: <85ejuojey3.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> (message from David Kastrup on Thu, 07 Sep 2006 09:47:32 +0200) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:59601 Archived-At: The present setting results in almost all cases in a recognizable cursor position (images with border 0 are possible only come Emacs 22.1). Are you saying that the problem of failing to show the cursor only applies when the border is 0, and that that is a new feature? In that case, let's limit my recommendations to the case when the border is 0. We can give :mask a different default, or make the lack of :mask an error, only when border is 0. I have experienced that: trust me, this default _is_ worse, much much worse than the existing one. That makes no sense at all. The current default (in the case with border 0) is not to show the cursor at all. (If I'm mistaken, please explain.) If we change it to heuristic-mask, then usually it would show the cursor. That is better than not showing the cursor. If you want me to believe this is worse, you'll have to demonstrate it with clear explanation, not emotional upset. preview-latex had to go to quite disadvantageous techniques to avoid large-scale flashing in Emacs 21. You'd reintroduce it. Would you please show the justification for that claim?x I think it would be a mistake to abuse :mask just in order to get the cursor to display in a useful way. There is no "abuse" in changing the default. In particular since it would mean that customizing the cursor type would have no effect on images, Why do you think it would mean that? > 3. If #2 is too complex to do now, maybe we should make it an error to > fail to specify :mask on an image on a character in the buffer. > That is simple. It will also break wagonloads of existing code. I doubt it. You've said border 0 is a new feature, so there can't be so much existing code that uses it.