> On Dec 23, 2023, at 2:17 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > >> From: Stefan Monnier >> Cc: dmitry@gutov.dev, 66732@debbugs.gnu.org, dominik@honnef.co, >> casouri@gmail.com >> Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2023 15:50:21 -0500 >> >>>> I think Dmitry is talking about the case where the faces were change >>>> after the text was rendered (but before the end of the redisplay cycle). >>>> >>>> I.e. the redisplay starts, renders up to position POS, then calls >>>> jit-lock because `fonfitied` is nil, and jit-lock modifies faces of text >>>> *before* POS. >>> >>> This can only happen if a function called from jit-lock doesn't comply >>> to the protocol wrt such changes, right? >> >> I'm talking about a problem in the interaction between the redisplay >> a jit-lock itself. >> >> Jit-lock is aware of it and uses `jit-lock-force-redisplay` as needed to >> account for it. >> >>> Because otherwise the modified region would have been re-rendered on >>> the next redisplay cycle at the latest. >> >> Yes, if the jit-lock client (e.g. font-lock) follows the protocol, then >> jit-lock should take care to re-render the regions when/where needed. >> >> *Except* that the implementation of `jit-lock-force-redisplay` is >> not effective and needs a change like the one suggested by Dmitry. > > So can we install that change and close this bug, then? I have a patch. Dmitry, WDYT? Yuan