From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel,gmane.emacs.pretest.bugs Subject: Re: invisible Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 15:19:12 -0500 Message-ID: References: <20040225.150142.12214540.kazu@iijlab.net> <200402282128.i1SLSuY15359@raven.dms.auburn.edu> <200402290224.i1T2Oip15705@raven.dms.auburn.edu> <87sl3fdqs3.fsf@escher.local.home> <87zlxc5r2f.fsf@escher.local.home> <474059CD.1060107@gmx.at> <87r6ihi1z7.fsf@escher.local.home> <4746E2CF.4010604@gmx.at> <87k5o8q0y5.fsf@escher.local.home> <4747312D.7020605@gmx.at> <87fxywpuuy.fsf@escher.local.home> <47474B8C.9020806@gmx.at> <87bq9kpnqd.fsf@escher.local.home> <4747EFE8.5090405@gmx.at> <87k5o7mnhw.fsf@escher.local.home> <4748A52C.6090407@gmx.at> <474A7D7E.20504@gmx.at> <474B1A1D.4050901@gmx.at> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1196108384 23402 80.91.229.12 (26 Nov 2007 20:19:44 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 20:19:44 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org, Stephen Berman , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: martin rudalics Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Nov 26 21:19:51 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 1IwkQi-0006Kd-BE for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 21:19:44 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IwkQT-0008SN-4T for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 15:19:29 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IwkQO-0008Ru-Jv for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 15:19:24 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IwkQN-0008RZ-9S for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 15:19:24 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IwkQM-0008RW-Vy for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 15:19:23 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1IwkQM-0006o8-OM for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 15:19:22 -0500 Original-Received: from mail.gnu.org ([199.232.76.166] helo=mx10.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1IwkQM-0004Ti-A1 for emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 15:19:22 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1IwkQI-0006n4-AZ for emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 15:19:21 -0500 Original-Received: from mercure.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.24.67]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1IwkQH-0006mp-KP; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 15:19:17 -0500 Original-Received: from hidalgo.iro.umontreal.ca (hidalgo.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.27.50]) by mercure.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF0552CE9C3; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 15:19:16 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from faina.iro.umontreal.ca (faina.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.26.177]) by hidalgo.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2495A3FE0; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 15:19:12 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: by faina.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 156576CA42; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 15:19:12 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <474B1A1D.4050901@gmx.at> (martin rudalics's message of "Mon, 26 Nov 2007 20:10:21 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-DIRO-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-DIRO-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-DIRO-MailScanner-SpamCheck: n'est pas un polluriel, SpamAssassin (score=-2.82, requis 5, autolearn=not spam, ALL_TRUSTED -2.82) X-DIRO-MailScanner-From: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) 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:84166 gmane.emacs.pretest.bugs:20375 Archived-At: >> The rear-nonsticky change proposed above will just make both ends >> non-sticky so the point-adjustment will not have a preference and will >> sometimes choose one sometimes the other. > I agree that would be bad. Is that the way it behaves now when I set > the rear-nonsticky property? Yes. >> In general facemenu-set-invisible can't know whether the user will want >> to insert text "precisely at the beginning of the visible text" or >> "precisely at the end of the visible text". > In general you're right. I was referring to the effect immediately > after executing that command. I see. >> This said, I think you're right: the rear-nonsticky property would be >> beneficial for the case where the invisible text is shown as an >> ellipsis, in which case the user can indeed choose where she inserts >> the text. > That would be fine. Maybe you want to post this suggestion in a new thread. Stefan