From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dmitry Gutov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#15899: 24.3.50; regression: `region' overlay is lower priority than default Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2013 12:25:36 +0200 Message-ID: <52874820.2020601@yandex.ru> References: <20137354-f982-4314-9c09-21a5fbc36557@default> <83ob5mi02j.fsf@gnu.org> <83bo1liv80.fsf@gnu.org> <87mwl58yvc.fsf@yandex.ru> <834n7dipnq.fsf@gnu.org> <5286A1AD.1080106@yandex.ru> <83wqk8hgtf.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.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 1384597579 14668 80.91.229.3 (16 Nov 2013 10:26:19 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2013 10:26:19 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 15899@debbugs.gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Nov 16 11:26:21 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Vhd52-0003Mv-Fu for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 16 Nov 2013 11:26:20 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:35385 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Vhd51-0003el-SV for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 16 Nov 2013 05:26:19 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35146) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Vhd4r-0003Ow-RD for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 16 Nov 2013 05:26:17 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Vhd4k-0005VH-HX for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 16 Nov 2013 05:26:09 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:42703) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Vhd4k-0005VD-E2 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 16 Nov 2013 05:26:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Vhd4j-0001Zz-PF for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 16 Nov 2013 05:26:01 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Dmitry Gutov Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2013 10:26:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 15899 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 15899-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B15899.13845975506052 (code B ref 15899); Sat, 16 Nov 2013 10:26:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 15899) by debbugs.gnu.org; 16 Nov 2013 10:25:50 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56722 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Vhd4X-0001ZX-IR for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 16 Nov 2013 05:25:50 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-ea0-f180.google.com ([209.85.215.180]:57574) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Vhd4T-0001ZJ-U0 for 15899@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 16 Nov 2013 05:25:46 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-ea0-f180.google.com with SMTP id b11so1732938eae.25 for <15899@debbugs.gnu.org>; Sat, 16 Nov 2013 02:25:40 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ayvDPeeMnJmdY9IkTuoBIJlhM0Y0AYNDSLEnmc1sveE=; b=n6h5S+juwShzpwv/ufsbJEzaTlsT5QMjtPYRHMTgMcdAiEcwEv1KCdIl51UAf66WeZ S50UgO8gAHvT1ws3Uy2tAH6ZyGhlr+JVhC5lqUtFjjO6PiZh2o4Dxbn+eKaLLoeM5eoM //ZpyRhbwYnt5y8GsnZOdekjfVS8EAPBoHwXA+Lqtz9Xh0iBxoDkdgx8jPUC0kUfz77y H4I2urKxkJx1S1U6U9RsVL4zymZt/PXAx8x1DTlOo7VQHp/ywLIDjkCuF1X2KsRxYVtx fuwcG7DFQo/sOrGIIm66sFOO/1KZdBNgAq464WSHyvHZIOHoH+/HCAASXdJxhEw1Pc3I 8Kug== X-Received: by 10.14.172.133 with SMTP id t5mr7061787eel.35.1384597539964; Sat, 16 Nov 2013 02:25:39 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from [192.168.10.2] (62-113-224.netrun.cytanet.com.cy. [62.228.113.224]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id l9sm15362028eew.6.2013.11.16.02.25.37 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 16 Nov 2013 02:25:39 -0800 (PST) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.0 In-Reply-To: <83wqk8hgtf.fsf@gnu.org> X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:80635 Archived-At: On 16.11.2013 10:49, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> Yes, but if the region overlay will have priority infinity, the >> inconsistency will "be gone" in the opposite way from how 15618 was >> resolved. > > But the behavior will still be consistent. And complaint about > inconsistency is how I read that bug report. It even asks "which is > the right behavior?", implying that having it consistent either way > would be OK. The bug report was what is was, but `easy-kill' depends on region highlighting working in a certain way. >> Which will make the related feature of `easy-kill' much harder (maybe >> impossible) to implement. > > Can you tell more about this feature, and why it cares to be "more > equal" than the region? (Sorry, I don't have time to read the source > or try it.) Why is it important for easy-kill overlay to make region > highlighting invisible? It has a command `easy-mark' which selects some unit of text around point. And it uses a dedicated overlay to mark the place where point was before the command was called, in color. So that overlay needs to have higher priority than region. No need to make region highlighting invisible. >> If the region overlay will have a high but finite and documented >> priority, that would be much better. > > Which will start an "overlay priority arms race", something I loathe. I don't think so. The region overlay priority won't change, even if people decide to shoot themselves in the foot and raise priorities of overlays inappropriately.