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: Error during redisplay Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 18:46:19 -0500 Message-ID: References: Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1204069604 20066 80.91.229.12 (26 Feb 2008 23:46:44 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 23:46:44 +0000 (UTC) Cc: lekktu@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Kenichi Handa Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Feb 27 00:47:10 2008 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 1JU9Vj-0004TU-8Y for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 27 Feb 2008 00:46:59 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JU9VD-0002M6-Bp for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 18:46:27 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JU9V8-0002LX-Qm for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 18:46:22 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JU9V6-0002KK-Qu for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 18:46:21 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JU9V6-0002KC-Km for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 18:46:20 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JU9V6-0006Do-0J for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 18:46:20 -0500 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1JU9V5-0001nM-1x; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 18:46:19 -0500 In-reply-to: (message from Kenichi Handa on Tue, 26 Feb 2008 13:18:05 +0900) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: 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:90547 Archived-At: > to .emacs fixes the problem. Apparently, pure strings in > mode-line-format don't like to be added auto-composed properties. In auto-compose-chars, inhibit-read-only is bound to t while the code add auto-composed property. If it's still not allowed, are there anyway to detect that the string is pure? There is something not clean about trying to modify a string in mode-line-format when a user turns on a feature that doesn't intend to change the mode line. That seems like a flaw in the design of something. The strings in mode-line-format are supposed to be set up correct when Emacs is dumped. Should they have these properties, or not? That is the first question. If they SHOULD have these properties, probably we should make sure they have these properties from the start, or from an early point in building Emacs. If they SHOULD NOT have these properties, why is anything trying to give them these properties? Stefan wrote: > In auto-compose-chars, inhibit-read-only is bound to t while > the code add auto-composed property. If it's still not > allowed, are there anyway to detect that the string is pure? The only way I can think of is to try it and catch the error signalled. One possible solution is to avoid making those strings pure in the first place. But this could be papering over a design flaw, so first we should look at the questions above.