From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Colin Walters Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Question about copy-region-as-kill Date: 07 Apr 2002 23:14:51 -0400 Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <1018235691.1186.40.camel@space-ghost> References: <87ofh09xjq.fsf@alice.dynodns.net> <200204050602.g3562Dl18586@aztec.santafe.edu> <87bscx7rlf.fsf@alice.dynodns.net> <200204061732.g36HWSb19584@aztec.santafe.edu> <87k7rkmuk0.fsf@alice.dynodns.net> <87zo0gbfb2.fsf@emacswiki.org> <1018138376.27236.49.camel@space-ghost> <87bscwe36t.fsf@tc-1-100.kawasaki.gol.ne.jp> <874rio5ide.fsf@alice.dynodns.net> <1018154686.1186.13.camel@space-ghost> <200204072342.g37Ngm020048@aztec.santafe.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1018237650 15967 127.0.0.1 (8 Apr 2002 03:47:30 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 03:47:30 +0000 (UTC) Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 16uQ7u-00049Q-00 for ; Mon, 08 Apr 2002 05:47:30 +0200 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 16uQM7-0008Dm-00 for ; Mon, 08 Apr 2002 06:02:11 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 16uPoE-0006t8-00; Sun, 07 Apr 2002 23:27:10 -0400 Original-Received: from monk.debian.net ([216.185.54.61] helo=monk.verbum.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 16uPhP-0006ey-00 for ; Sun, 07 Apr 2002 23:20:07 -0400 Original-Received: from space-ghost.verbum.private (freedom.cis.ohio-state.edu [164.107.60.183]) (using TLSv1 with cipher EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA (168/168 bits)) (Client CN "space-ghost.verbum.org", Issuer "monk.verbum.org" (verified OK)) by monk.verbum.org (Postfix (Debian/GNU)) with ESMTP id C2CA1740009E for ; Sun, 7 Apr 2002 23:20:06 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: by space-ghost.verbum.private (Postfix (Debian/GNU), from userid 1000) id 8275A80694C; Sun, 7 Apr 2002 23:14:51 -0400 (EDT) Original-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org In-Reply-To: <200204072342.g37Ngm020048@aztec.santafe.edu> X-Mailer: Evolution/1.0 (Preview Release) Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.8 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:2458 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:2458 On Sun, 2002-04-07 at 19:42, Richard Stallman wrote: > If we had extents, the right way to solve that problem, in my opinion, > would be to add another extent with a higher priority face, and another > property like 'temporary t. Then, you could search for all extents with > a 'temporary property, and delete them. > > You can do this now, with overlays. Overlays are a lot like extents. Yes. In fact, as far as I can see, overlays are only really missing one major feature; what the XEmacs people call the "duplicable" property, such that when text covered by an extent is copied and later inserted into another buffer, a new extent with the same properties is created covering the text. > We can do that, too. In fact, we partly already have. > I was trying to convince you to help do more of it. Yes, you mentioned insert-with-overlays. I'm going to work on it after finishing update-game-score. > The advantages you see are not real advantages because they are not > really differences. If you like the extent facility it makes no sense > for you to dislike the extremely similar overlay facility. Extremely similar, except for that all-important duplicable property, which would solve my ibuffer problem in a clean way.