From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: forward-comment and syntax-ppss Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2016 08:56:55 +0200 Message-ID: <838trogtl4.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20161206195507.GA2996@acm.fritz.box> <83fd1db0-7362-6117-c5cd-715398c0dea4@gmail.com> <20161207220447.GA4503@acm.fritz.box> <20161208201517.GB3120@acm.fritz.box> <20161209180059.GB2203@acm.fritz.box> <1cd4ee6e-5da1-450e-ed68-42910015eaed@gmail.com> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1481353031 12725 195.159.176.226 (10 Dec 2016 06:57:11 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2016 06:57:11 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: =?windows-1252?Q?Cl=E9ment?= Pit--Claudel Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Dec 10 07:57:08 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cFbaj-000228-Ge for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 10 Dec 2016 07:57:05 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50531 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cFbal-0008N8-Lx for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 10 Dec 2016 01:57:07 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49096) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cFba8-0008GR-Q5 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Dec 2016 01:56:29 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cFba5-0002AW-Nz for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Dec 2016 01:56:28 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:56905) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cFba5-0002AS-KT; Sat, 10 Dec 2016 01:56:25 -0500 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:4923 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1cFba4-0003tE-P0; Sat, 10 Dec 2016 01:56:25 -0500 In-reply-to: <1cd4ee6e-5da1-450e-ed68-42910015eaed@gmail.com> (message from =?windows-1252?Q?Cl=E9ment?= Pit--Claudel on Fri, 9 Dec 2016 17:33:09 -0500) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:210218 Archived-At: > From: Clément Pit--Claudel > Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2016 17:33:09 -0500 > > Alan, is it valid to say that you view narrowing as a convenient editing feature that lets you restrict operations to a subsection of the buffer? Something like a "window" over the buffer (or maybe "stencil" would be a better term?), which doesn't change any of semantic meaning, but just conveniently restricts motion? > In that sense, your vision of narrowing is similar to my applying two overlays to make the beginning of the buffer invisible up to a point, and the end of the buffer invisible starting from a point, right? It is similar, but not equivalent, because neither search commands nor the display engine will stop where the invisible text starts. > Stefan, am I correct in thinking that the narrowing that you mention above is of a different nature, in the sense that if I narrow a buffer to the range a…b it's just as if I had copied that portion of the buffer to a totally separate, disconnected buffer (possibly running a different mode), and the text would get copied back into the original buffer when I widen? This is the only meaning of narrowing that exists in Emacs as of now. > Maybe the solution is to just give these two things a different name? The other thing would have to be implemented first. And if it is indistinguishable from invisible text, then we already have it, just under a different name ;-)