From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Question about copy-region-as-kill Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2002 17:42:48 -0600 (MDT) Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <200204072342.g37Ngm020048@aztec.santafe.edu> 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> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1018230174 9123 127.0.0.1 (8 Apr 2002 01:42:54 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 01:42:54 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 16uOBJ-0002N2-00 for ; Mon, 08 Apr 2002 03:42:53 +0200 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 16uOPT-0005Vu-00 for ; Mon, 08 Apr 2002 03:57:31 +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 16uNYt-0000CN-00; Sun, 07 Apr 2002 21:03:11 -0400 Original-Received: from pele.santafe.edu ([192.12.12.119]) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 16uMJ7-0001AT-00; Sun, 07 Apr 2002 19:42:49 -0400 Original-Received: from aztec.santafe.edu (aztec [192.12.12.49]) by pele.santafe.edu (8.11.6+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id g37Ngma05364; Sun, 7 Apr 2002 17:42:48 -0600 (MDT) Original-Received: (from rms@localhost) by aztec.santafe.edu (8.10.2+Sun/8.9.3) id g37Ngm020048; Sun, 7 Apr 2002 17:42:48 -0600 (MDT) X-Authentication-Warning: aztec.santafe.edu: rms set sender to rms@aztec using -f Original-To: walters@verbum.org In-Reply-To: <1018154686.1186.13.camel@space-ghost> (message from Colin Walters on 06 Apr 2002 23:44:46 -0500) 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:2456 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:2456 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. Ok, I looked at the XEmacs manual a bit, and yes, that appears to be the case. Note that they have built a text properties/overlays type API on top of their extent mechanism. We can do that, too. In fact, we partly already have. I was trying to convince you to help do more of it. I guess all I can do is assert that an XEmacs-style extent mechanism would make a lot more sense to me, personally. 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.