From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: martin rudalics Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: invisible Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 17:36:19 +0100 Message-ID: <474EEA83.8060509@gmx.at> References: <20040225.150142.12214540.kazu@iijlab.net> <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> <474A7CF6.8030802@gmx.at> <474B19DB.6030803@gmx.at> <474C65FF.3070403@gmx.at> <474E93EC.9040909@gmx.at> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1196354260 7087 80.91.229.12 (29 Nov 2007 16:37:40 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 16:37:40 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Stephen.Berman@gmx.net, rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Nov 29 17:37:47 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 1IxmOS-0003tH-7u for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 29 Nov 2007 17:37:40 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IxmOC-0000Rh-JX for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 29 Nov 2007 11:37:24 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IxmO9-0000Rc-EY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 29 Nov 2007 11:37:21 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IxmO8-0000RO-Iy for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 29 Nov 2007 11:37:21 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IxmO8-0000RL-Fw for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 29 Nov 2007 11:37:20 -0500 Original-Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]) by monty-python.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1IxmO7-0003ee-RX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 29 Nov 2007 11:37:20 -0500 Original-Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 29 Nov 2007 16:37:17 -0000 Original-Received: from N721P031.adsl.highway.telekom.at (EHLO [62.47.34.31]) [62.47.34.31] by mail.gmx.net (mp044) with SMTP; 29 Nov 2007 17:37:17 +0100 X-Authenticated: #14592706 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX197KNg0gOt7JAfFzKoQLlXzQniBnZG6dwQ98UQsxH 9yQ30DSo2g3HRa User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206) X-Accept-Language: de-DE, de, en-us, en In-Reply-To: X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 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:84312 Archived-At: >>Currently, I don't have a test case where this fails with the >>default value of `line-move-ignore-invisible'. All problems stem >>from `line-move-ignore-invisible' nil. > > > Hmm... I didn't notice that part. But then do they also appear with > a line-move-ignore-invisible set to nil and a disable-point-adjustment > set to t? I would guess not (this case being trivial). > > If so, maybe the solution is to do as I suggested: get rid of > line-move-ignore-invisible and use (not disable-point-adjustment) in > its place. No because the problem is with point adjustment during line movement. It's got nothing to do with the command loop. I'm afraid my earlier discussion with Stephen about whether calling `forward-line' interactively or via `eval-expression' have the same effect is still muddying this discussion. To recapitulate: C-n/C-p call `forward-line' to move to the next/previous line. `forward-line' first invokes scan_newline to find the next/previous newline and position point after/before it. Thereafter it calls SET_PT_BOTH (pos, pos_byte); The latter refuses to position `point' immediately after rear-sticky invisible text.