From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dmitry Gutov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: region-based face-remapping Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2024 16:18:28 +0200 Message-ID: References: <83y1d7zy8s.fsf@gnu.org> <3592E8C5-35FF-44FF-88ED-B458303BF15A@gmail.com> <83edeyzjgp.fsf@gnu.org> <83y1d6y1n4.fsf@gnu.org> <3ce1e4f9-7f94-4d55-a614-a4c2c3ad6c27@gutov.dev> <83bka1y3w3.fsf@gnu.org> <1cb0b482-1149-4695-9345-a495418da7f9@gutov.dev> <834jfsw4du.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="18319"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cc: jdtsmith@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Jan 05 15:19:25 2024 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 1rLl2h-0004T0-NK for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 05 Jan 2024 15:19:25 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rLl1y-0000Ec-R7; Fri, 05 Jan 2024 09:18:38 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rLl1w-0000EU-RU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 05 Jan 2024 09:18:36 -0500 Original-Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.26]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rLl1u-0002dy-Vj; Fri, 05 Jan 2024 09:18:36 -0500 Original-Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.46]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F8835C0154; Fri, 5 Jan 2024 09:18:33 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 05 Jan 2024 09:18:33 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gutov.dev; h=cc :cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:content-type:date :date:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm1; t=1704464313; x=1704550713; bh=3IynfR0vyHUYUWpA1/VOH1af5PZmnMY2OPyToK6TMdA=; b= OtZOvExCPBkFKncVjxIGTecfOqy5k0JPUJ6ilf5ll/60ru9eiCO8fiBBu2qsaiQw 0wEVPfGrmNF6NSge/cCta0TOpqgRchHcnunv7nY19He1PXAZr4E7nsXoPhR7Pooi prV3BkHk7UCCRW0GqAamvkpNaf3V2u3i0V+T6T/qUniF1JZX3DFLDqs+p3HHTxZ9 NsCgOCNLGKi1/8G6Fj/CUW50YvGa3pmEv59bq8rHzF671InfwkEKCJWX/acG2xG5 59ycYfjaK2T9MGrKsbsMNfTHHlvIyyL3ejcNl0KtgCP97ElfeY+5lhT+pTMCAq3e qNJwNImZuA0f/AKv7oDfIA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:content-type:date:date:feedback-id:feedback-id :from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy :x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; t=1704464313; x= 1704550713; bh=3IynfR0vyHUYUWpA1/VOH1af5PZmnMY2OPyToK6TMdA=; b=6 QxB+emTWccelDuJ6N5AYimwhaSYwDJD+hW+yE7nIQ+gTH8/OEp9LmO+jLWDOvBpQ wpIFdozIQXa4ezahE/N664x+4XKutchfxuhZkvYRQEg9eFJdAThyOu5UxLNffJdP pV2mJym84tkIzXK851vfPcHuFJ3lFEbuEuST5IJSt4VXTa0Fhb2OaQ3fdsqFNpxb 7+oxEha8Gsu/jL2fu7UcQF2wKaYdHzAYGSyEiHTfXhXQ70JdDb+9KZ2rWhQWjxCm i/JbZXGcZCQwcMGP4Efdn991AY5zPRFOPqYKeE/w2hKwCMpplIpeHbchW6LCP3yZ wfHnSjRGQaQKaHD6ztG+w== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvkedrvdegledgiedtucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepkfffgggfhffuvfevfhgjtgfgsehtjeertddtvdejnecuhfhrohhmpeffmhhi thhrhicuifhuthhovhcuoegumhhithhrhiesghhuthhovhdruggvvheqnecuggftrfgrth htvghrnheptdfggedtheevvdejjefftefgtdfgfeehveejkeeijeetgffftdehfedvgfdt veeunecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepug hmihhtrhihsehguhhtohhvrdguvghv X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i0e71465a:Fastmail Original-Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Fri, 5 Jan 2024 09:18:32 -0500 (EST) Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: <834jfsw4du.fsf@gnu.org> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=66.111.4.26; envelope-from=dmitry@gutov.dev; helo=out2-smtp.messagingengine.com X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:314569 Archived-At: On 05/01/2024 10:50, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2024 05:49:24 +0200 >> Cc:jdtsmith@gmail.com,emacs-devel@gnu.org >> From: Dmitry Gutov >> >> On 04/01/2024 09:05, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >>> . one of the subroutines of face_at_buffer_position calls some Lisp >>> hook >>> . that Lisp hook calls code that calls face-font (or some other >>> primitive which takes face-remapping-alist into account) >> Could you give an example of a Lisp hook which might be called from >> face_at_buffer_position's subroutines? > Why is having a specific example important? > > Are you saying that there can never be such an example? Yes, it would seem odd to me for face_at_buffer_position to call any hooks. But if it did, I would consider whether any of the hooks being called would allow substituting the face with a different one (making it a different way to solve the present feature request). This sounds like a way to slow things down by an order of a magnitude, though, so it probably will not happen. > With the > current tendency of moving stuff to Lisp and adding hooks to C code, > we clearly cannot convince ourselves such a hook will never happen in > the future, even if it doesn't exist in this particular moment in > time. Even if it moved to Lisp, it won't necessarily add any hooks.