From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: 'M-o' ('facemap-keymap') has now been removed until March 10th 2021 Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2021 17:58:07 -0400 Message-ID: References: <32A55BBD-1A3F-4EC4-817F-7C3408C22A65@bydasein.com> <22aaf0faddac64397c7d@heytings.org> <4B2A00EB-8C04-4B9D-BA86-692D67207AFD@bydasein.com> <22aaf0faddc2bf87fd3a@heytings.org> <0009872A-AD9D-4B08-B714-BFEDDAAF9125@bydasein.com> <8786a8e8faf45a989904@heytings.org> <83sg4kjx5u.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="36972"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: gregory@heytings.org, "Paul W. Rankin" , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Mar 24 22:59:37 2021 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 1lPBXN-0009XH-33 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 24 Mar 2021 22:59:37 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50006 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lPBXM-00069O-44 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 24 Mar 2021 17:59:36 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:35498) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lPBW2-0005Fh-9E for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Mar 2021 17:58:14 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:43209) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lPBVz-0001YW-Pz; Wed, 24 Mar 2021 17:58:13 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 0C0664412F2; Wed, 24 Mar 2021 17:58:10 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 99DFF4412EF; Wed, 24 Mar 2021 17:58:08 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1616623088; bh=BRlwjiooYBLSlwAVQgxv06nnwUu0Cr0dq+BHgEJTRZM=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=CgA31zCsqsr7J/7MH+kZRinufKga9dT8mKNtny5EW0FGOTP5xEseR6CaTIynQn8Nt No12qHHRe/BW/Whlk17AzBEanfCTtSPqtwi/qnyImR3+Z1UjxQNssSFwRvjo1ZN/1o njKUW8A0mt6xdso4PjLHTt696C6iE30k3bS0zg+aP00zxxG8KtZd2nEpgLRtpkRZNl 02qheBrWBKvNJlOX8321Jletn36nv6AGv63dn/ASeHUzStZQLVpL7PeINhN4CbvFxS afQHhLt5AHGWCxWmkZz7Eae1G9yNVbHCLfdvCbrQH4qyOMl+qTs1TRygMtXO4uEqsZ XTPpI6MvKCcRw== Original-Received: from alfajor (unknown [216.154.43.249]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BC1B7120325; Wed, 24 Mar 2021 17:58:07 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <83sg4kjx5u.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Wed, 24 Mar 2021 19:09:49 +0200") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-Spam_score_int: -42 X-Spam_score: -4.3 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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:266987 Archived-At: > Btw, the "without font-lock-mode active" part is not the situation I > was talking about. Remember: global-font-lock-mode is now t by > default, so bumping into a buffer where font-lock-mode isn't active is > quite hard... FWIW, `text-mode` *is* in that category, which is why `font-lock-fontify-block` does something (i.e. erase `face` properties). In `text-mode`, `font-lock-mode` is t (if you use default config) yet font-lock is not actually activated because `font-lock-keywords` is nil. This is because of the `font-lock-specified-p` test in `font-lock-default-function`. I don't much like this distinction between "`font-lock-mode` is non-nil" and "the font-lock machinery is actually activated". Stefan