From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: questions about correct reveal-mode usage to hide passwords Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2020 13:49:00 -0400 Message-ID: References: <4973bec9-0abf-8f55-0b60-0879b6fe1fa7@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="104051"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: =?windows-1252?Q?Cl=E9ment?= Pit-Claudel Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Jun 11 19:50:11 2020 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 1jjRL9-000QwQ-3P for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 19:50:11 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:54936 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jjRL8-0003LK-1T for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 13:50:10 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:48738) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jjRK8-0002RB-CJ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 13:49:08 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:26197) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jjRK6-0008IR-0h for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 13:49:07 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id B71514417D6; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 13:49:03 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 3AD704417B2; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 13:49:02 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1591897742; bh=pPTTB41BbjkdM6TWG2O+vfmcq3h9x6fH1veYpy2jQTc=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=AAE/cFEteUyy5cHFPcJFyOAX870tCbdWpZkybpMQ8pH/npNc7I+C0eRDSJW7Cd55m kI2HMwxfrRFJcyWRpP6mrkmydtM0mAFCCQd9Wpd0HwmpUDz3hv5+5PhbzqbvDXNVEJ dvSxTruwMlLnsTNO1AVtCFRhuDys87iQ3bTMGp9w/eQKugSll++CLGaJAB6xLNC5EK GLlylCHXXL9Yt1zMIts/M/2Og7R9b38IVPuchB38qC5om9Y2fOjd2byf24naf1iIPG fYPBvNvOAhYObNIobLExsOkc72UB7V02z2TVnQGQtLlJWiplX5S/zk4lA+DD+6f8B5 fS+Tje6bEy8pA== Original-Received: from alfajor (unknown [216.154.55.41]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F24FC120497; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 13:49:01 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <4973bec9-0abf-8f55-0b60-0879b6fe1fa7@gmail.com> (=?windows-1252?Q?=22Cl=E9ment?= Pit-Claudel"'s message of "Thu, 11 Jun 2020 13:43:14 -0400") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/06/11 13:33:30 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] 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, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001 autolearn=_AUTOLEARN 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:252125 Archived-At: >>>> One[1] uses font-lock mode to adapt to >>>> change dynamically, which works well for live editing, but you can't see >>>> the password when you're editing it. >>> font-lock is the perfect way to implement this, and it should be easy to >> >> I'd recommend using jit-lock rather than font-lock. >> It might be a case of bikeshedding, but I think it will be both easier >> to implement and more robust. > > Hmm. I meant font-lock-keywords and text properties (which will benefit > from jit-lock, of course), rather than hooking up directly into jit-lock and > using overlays. Is there something wrong with the text-properties approach? It's just that using `font-lock-keywords` is fiddly, and then you also have to set `font-lock-extra-managed-props`, ... And next thing you know a user wants to use your thing but doesn't want font-lock coloring, ... Stefan