From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: jonetsu Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: Large text files - no line numbers ? Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2019 10:46:11 -0500 Message-ID: <20191205104611.07377f8c@mistral> References: <20191204094704.26e32c9e@mistral> <831rtkjef8.fsf@gnu.org> <20191205094421.6bfc46e7@mistral> <838snqiypc.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="50826"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Dec 05 16:59:09 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1ictX3-000D5x-3w for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 05 Dec 2019 16:59:09 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56754 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ictX1-0004PX-U1 for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 05 Dec 2019 10:59:07 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:53089) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ictKY-0002LN-QA for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 05 Dec 2019 10:46:17 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ictKX-0001BS-34 for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 05 Dec 2019 10:46:14 -0500 Original-Received: from pmta11.teksavvy.com ([76.10.157.34]:49400) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ictKW-00016w-PS for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 05 Dec 2019 10:46:12 -0500 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A2E9FAAKJeld/8e4VMZlHQEBAQkBEQUFA?= =?us-ascii?q?YF+AoIegUAzKoNjiUuIITUBjlURiheBegkBAQE6AQIBAYQ6AgIBAQKCESc6BA0?= =?us-ascii?q?CEAEBAQQBAQEBAQUEAgJphGtYhigBBAE6HCgLCAMJGCUPSBmFeiCwJ4h8gUgig?= =?us-ascii?q?RQBjCQMgUBAg3YuPoQjc4R/IgSWcUaXE4I4ggKTTCcNjiiLcYQ/hXqgSAMdgVh?= =?us-ascii?q?wFYMnUCWMcheOQSYwgQEBBgEBARUIEwUFAQGNYYJAAQE?= X-IPAS-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A2E9FAAKJeld/8e4VMZlHQEBAQkBEQUFAYF+AoIegUAzKoN?= =?us-ascii?q?jiUuIITUBjlURiheBegkBAQE6AQIBAYQ6AgIBAQKCESc6BA0CEAEBAQQBAQEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QUEAgJphGtYhigBBAE6HCgLCAMJGCUPSBmFeiCwJ4h8gUgigRQBjCQMgUBAg3Y?= =?us-ascii?q?uPoQjc4R/IgSWcUaXE4I4ggKTTCcNjiiLcYQ/hXqgSAMdgVhwFYMnUCWMcheOQ?= =?us-ascii?q?SYwgQEBBgEBARUIEwUFAQGNYYJAAQE?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.69,281,1571716800"; d="scan'208";a="112820795" Original-Received: from 198-84-184-199.cpe.teksavvy.com (HELO mistral) ([198.84.184.199]) by smtp.teksavvy.com with ESMTP; 05 Dec 2019 10:46:11 -0500 In-Reply-To: <838snqiypc.fsf@gnu.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.16.0 (GTK+ 2.24.32; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 76.10.157.34 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "help-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:122015 Archived-At: On Thu, 05 Dec 2019 17:22:55 +0200 Eli Zaretskii wrote: > Sorry, I don't understand. What do you mean by "unaffected", and what > do you mean by "behave wrongly"? Unaffected means that whereas putting 1000 in line-number-display-limit-width has solved the 'L??' by making it display actual line numbers, the bookmark functionality behaves wrongly as it will not jump to a bookmark, but somewhere else in the file. As it did before updating the line-number-display-limit-width value. It behaves wrongly in the sense that since line numbers are now displayed correctly, it could be right to assume that the bookmarks will now work as intended (they did not when L?? was displayed) - but they do not. It also behaves wrongly in this use case as setting bookmarks in other, much smaller files, still works as expected. > How is this related to bookmarks? By assuming that the L?? display also prevented the bookmark feature from functioning correctly. Mind you, I do not know how the bookmark feature works.