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: Default of jit-lock-stealth-time Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 21:37:47 -0500 Message-ID: References: <85tzxazb8r.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <87ps7x4clj.fsf@pacem.orebokech.com> <85irdpweuq.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <85649pw652.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <85vehnn9un.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1172630490 30141 80.91.229.12 (28 Feb 2007 02:41:30 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 02:41:30 +0000 (UTC) Cc: schwab@suse.de, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: David Kastrup Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Feb 28 03:41:20 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HMEkp-00077A-J5 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 28 Feb 2007 03:41:19 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HMEkp-000845-MH for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 27 Feb 2007 21:41:19 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HMEiy-0007MN-LK for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Feb 2007 21:39:24 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HMEiy-0007M5-4w for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Feb 2007 21:39:24 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HMEiy-0007M0-09 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Feb 2007 21:39:24 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1HMEix-00057S-O8 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Feb 2007 21:39:23 -0500 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1HMEhP-00052t-Ho; Tue, 27 Feb 2007 21:37:47 -0500 In-reply-to: <85vehnn9un.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> (message from David Kastrup on Tue, 27 Feb 2007 12:00:48 +0100) X-detected-kernel: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) 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:66986 Archived-At: > The question now is whether it _avoids_ a substantial inconvenience > for a substantial fraction of users. Well, one pointer would be if we had somebody who turned it off, only to turn it back on later again because of getting inconvenienced. It does not appear like we have such a specimen around. You may be right. I'm asking anyone who DOES finr stealth fontification useful to speak up. Eli Z seemed to say so, but has not given details. We will see what he has to say.