From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Drew Adams Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#15899: 24.3.50; regression: `region' overlay is lower priority than default Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2013 10:01:19 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <67d3dd9d-9abe-488f-80eb-7d647bd81e7e@default> References: <20137354-f982-4314-9c09-21a5fbc36557@default> <83ob5mi02j.fsf@gnu.org> <83bo1liv80.fsf@gnu.org> <83txfchg0u.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1384624943 24556 80.91.229.3 (16 Nov 2013 18:02:23 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2013 18:02:23 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 15899@debbugs.gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier , Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Nov 16 19:02:26 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 1VhkCP-00053D-2l for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 16 Nov 2013 19:02:25 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:36520 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VhkCO-00056w-55 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 16 Nov 2013 13:02:24 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49402) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VhkCC-00055Y-8R for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 16 Nov 2013 13:02:20 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VhkC3-00005c-00 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 16 Nov 2013 13:02:12 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:43386) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VhkC2-00004z-S4 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 16 Nov 2013 13:02:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1VhkC2-0005xU-1n for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 16 Nov 2013 13:02:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Drew Adams Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2013 18:02:01 +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=B15899.138462489022862 (code B ref 15899); Sat, 16 Nov 2013 18:02:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 15899) by debbugs.gnu.org; 16 Nov 2013 18:01:30 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57405 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1VhkBV-0005wg-ST for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 16 Nov 2013 13:01:30 -0500 Original-Received: from aserp1040.oracle.com ([141.146.126.69]:29740) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1VhkBT-0005wR-HH for 15899@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 16 Nov 2013 13:01:28 -0500 Original-Received: from acsinet22.oracle.com (acsinet22.oracle.com [141.146.126.238]) by aserp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.1/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.1) with ESMTP id rAGI1K30010706 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Sat, 16 Nov 2013 18:01:21 GMT Original-Received: from aserz7022.oracle.com (aserz7022.oracle.com [141.146.126.231]) by acsinet22.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id rAGI1JOY026790 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 16 Nov 2013 18:01:20 GMT Original-Received: from abhmp0020.oracle.com (abhmp0020.oracle.com [141.146.116.26]) by aserz7022.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id rAGI1JDY026783; Sat, 16 Nov 2013 18:01:19 GMT In-Reply-To: X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.8 (707110) [OL 12.0.6680.5000 (x86)] X-Source-IP: acsinet22.oracle.com [141.146.126.238] 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:80655 Archived-At: > > It's enough for that face to specify a background color, no? >=20 > In some cases, yes, because the region's foreground color is > often unnoticeable (e.g. same as default). That's only by default. We should not base too many assumptions on any particular face attributes for face `region'. It is user customizable. Better to plan for it to be like any other face: any attributes at all, at least as much as we can. > >> I most-positive-fixnum-ly hate overlay priorities. > > No offense, but I think we can live with that downside ;-) >=20 > The downside is not that I hate it, but the reasons why I hate > it: it's as much a source of problems as a solution. > `priorities' impose a total ordering, where often there isn't > one: in some circumstance one overlay should be on top, in > others it's the other way around. I don't disagree (and I'm glad that you are giving reasons ;-)). But what is a better approach? A total ordering is black & white, but at least it gives people a degree of control. And at least that control is simple: a total ordering is a simple model. How about giving an example of a problem? And a solution - something that solves that problem and gives users more (not less) control. > The "default priority" at least is able to handle those things > sometimes, by making overlays's ordering depending on nesting. Not sure what that means, and I wish I did understand what you mean by that. Can you give a tiny example to illustrate? > > In any case, the moment you reimplemented the region as an > > overlay, you got us this issue, because it is inherent in > > the use of overlays, and cannot be escaped. >=20 > It was present before as well. The behavior was different > but was also a source of "priority problems". Not clear how so. Can you elaborate? Are you referring to the fact that a user who wants to see some other highlighting (besides isearch) "on top" could not do so? That I can see. If you mean something else then I don't know what it is. > My intuition tells me that if Emacs had use the current system > for the last 20 years and had just changed to the "region is > always at the very top", people would complain just as much. People sometimes complain less when (a) the new behavior is proposed and explained and (b) they have an opportunity to question and discuss it. We are certainly doing that here, now, but this is something that would be more appropriate for emacs-devel, IMO. It would have been better to initiate a discussion and proposal there, pointing to the bug report and outlining what the behavior changes would be. But you've heard this before...