From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#15899: 24.3.50; regression: `region' overlay is lower priority than default Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2013 16:40:47 +0200 Message-ID: <83bo1liv80.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20137354-f982-4314-9c09-21a5fbc36557@default> <83ob5mi02j.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1384526532 1546 80.91.229.3 (15 Nov 2013 14:42:12 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2013 14:42:12 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 15899@debbugs.gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Nov 15 15:42:16 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 1VhKb9-00049u-2F for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 15:42:15 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:60642 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VhKb8-0003aT-Nb for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 09:42:14 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:33645) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VhKb0-0003S7-Qk for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 09:42:11 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VhKaw-0001g4-6v for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 09:42:06 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:40219) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VhKaw-0001g0-3f for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 09:42:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1VhKav-0004MU-UV for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 09:42:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2013 14:42:01 +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=B15899.138452647016708 (code B ref 15899); Fri, 15 Nov 2013 14:42:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 15899) by debbugs.gnu.org; 15 Nov 2013 14:41:10 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54238 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1VhKa6-0004LP-8L for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 09:41:10 -0500 Original-Received: from mtaout23.012.net.il ([80.179.55.175]:64573) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1VhKa3-0004L9-RE for 15899@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 09:41:08 -0500 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout23.012.net.il by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0MWB0020077V5Q00@a-mtaout23.012.net.il> for 15899@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 16:41:02 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0MWB002I17GD1KB0@a-mtaout23.012.net.il>; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 16:41:02 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il 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:80596 Archived-At: > From: Stefan Monnier > Cc: Drew Adams , 15899@debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2013 08:54:15 -0500 > > I'm not convinced it's a bug, since this "bug" was also the fix for > another bug. Was that other bug also about priorities of faces? > It's a change, there's no doubt about that. Whether it's better or > worse is not so clear. Isn't it confusing that the region highlighting is non-contiguous when an overlay is in its middle? What are the downsides of setting the region overlay's priority to most-positive-fixnum?