From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: hiding lines Date: Fri, 03 Apr 2009 09:22:26 -0400 Message-ID: References: <20090402.085201.106432638.wl@gnu.org> <20090402193050.GA10678@muc.de> <20090403122603.GA3082@muc.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1238765703 15831 80.91.229.12 (3 Apr 2009 13:35:03 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2009 13:35:03 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Alan Mackenzie Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Apr 03 15:36:21 2009 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 1LpjZ4-000432-Ny for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 03 Apr 2009 15:36:11 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38200 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LpjXf-0004rV-S8 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 03 Apr 2009 09:34:44 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LpjLu-0007dK-FJ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 03 Apr 2009 09:22:34 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LpjLp-0007bK-Aj for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 03 Apr 2009 09:22:33 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=39563 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LpjLo-0007b9-PR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 03 Apr 2009 09:22:28 -0400 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.pppoe.ca ([206.248.154.182]:35020 helo=ironport2-out.teksavvy.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LpjLo-0003Vx-Ew for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 03 Apr 2009 09:22:28 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AjIHABuq1UnO+Lq2/2dsb2JhbACBUs4ThA8GhQg X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.39,319,1235970000"; d="scan'208";a="36147718" Original-Received: from 206-248-186-182.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO pastel.home) ([206.248.186.182]) by ironport2-out.teksavvy.com with ESMTP; 03 Apr 2009 09:22:26 -0400 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id BFCA58095; Fri, 3 Apr 2009 09:22:26 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <20090403122603.GA3082@muc.de> (Alan Mackenzie's message of "Fri, 3 Apr 2009 12:26:04 +0000") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.92 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. 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:110037 Archived-At: > I don't know exactly what `invisible' and `intangible' text/overlay > properties mean. Basically: - `invisible' means "not displayed". - `intangible' means "can't put point in it (if you try, point will be put at the beginning or the end of the intangible text). Not being able to put point in a piece of text has far reaching consequences, e.g. (/= (1+ (point)) (save-excursion (forward-char 1) (point))) so it tends to introduce bugs in all kinds of places. The read-eval loop has a built-in post-command-hook (controlled by disable-point-adjustment and global-disable-point-adjustment) that moves point outside of `invisible' text (as well as outside of char-compositions, and outside of images), so `invisible' text is treated as somewhat intangible, except this kind of intangibility is only applied after a command is done running, which introduces much fewer problems than the `intangible' property which is applied at a much lower level. > I don't know when to use each of them, when to use both of > them together. If you don't know, then you probably don't want to use `intangible'. > For example, the documentation implies that if I isearch for something > inside the invisible bit, the cursor should end up on the other side of > the invisibility. Instead, it does the Right Thing. Can you point me to the place that implies this behavior? > It seems though, at least in C Mode, that when a user makes part of his > buffer invisible, the invisible bits are still seen by the parsing > routines in CC Mode. I don't know why this is so. Because `invisible' isn't like narrowing: it only prevents the display, but doesn't remove the text. > The documentation, (Elisp manual pages "Invisible Text" and "special > properties") is of no help here. It says, in effect, "The invisible > property sort of does this". > Are there any complete descriptions of these properties anywhere? Are > there any guidelines for there use anywhere? Looks like the doc needs some improvement. Thanks for pointing it out. Stefan