From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#48841: bug#47711: [PATCH VERSION 2] Add new `completion-filter-completions` API and deferred highlighting Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2021 10:01:48 +0300 Message-ID: <83im08bjc3.fsf@gnu.org> References: <3d3f894f-a6fa-53ae-5d50-c3aa9bffc73e@daniel-mendler.de> <56ab18b1-4348-9b2c-85bb-af9b76cd429a@daniel-mendler.de> <38a06f3c-4a7a-755c-c99b-708f91afabfa@daniel-mendler.de> <9f59f87c-2489-aaa0-5b3f-0e911b7ffa6c@daniel-mendler.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="30928"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: 47711@debbugs.gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, joaotavora@gmail.com, 48841@debbugs.gnu.org, dgutov@yandex.ru To: Daniel Mendler Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Aug 14 09:03:09 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mEnhF-0007rO-OS for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 14 Aug 2021 09:03:09 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:37320 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mEnhE-0001lV-CU for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 14 Aug 2021 03:03:08 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:38448) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mEnh8-0001jv-LG for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 14 Aug 2021 03:03:02 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:60153) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mEnh8-0007TO-Ee for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 14 Aug 2021 03:03:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mEnh8-0003Il-CS for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 14 Aug 2021 03:03:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2021 07:03:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 48841 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 48841-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B48841.162892453912624 (code B ref 48841); Sat, 14 Aug 2021 07:03:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 48841) by debbugs.gnu.org; 14 Aug 2021 07:02:19 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43463 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mEngN-0003HS-5f for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 14 Aug 2021 03:02:19 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:50200) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mEngH-0003H8-Ok; Sat, 14 Aug 2021 03:02:14 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:43850) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mEngB-0006iO-5Y; Sat, 14 Aug 2021 03:02:03 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:2015 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mEngA-0003L8-2Y; Sat, 14 Aug 2021 03:02:03 -0400 In-Reply-To: <9f59f87c-2489-aaa0-5b3f-0e911b7ffa6c@daniel-mendler.de> (message from Daniel Mendler on Fri, 13 Aug 2021 14:56:38 +0200) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:211807 Archived-At: > From: Daniel Mendler > Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2021 14:56:38 +0200 > Cc: 47711@debbugs.gnu.org, Stefan Monnier , > 48841@debbugs.gnu.org, Dmitry Gutov > > On 8/13/21 2:37 PM, João Távora wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 13, 2021 at 1:22 PM Daniel Mendler wrote: > > > >> It is important to keep this property since this will preclude many bugs > >> due to string mutation. > > > > I am aware of this, of course. Can you give examples of these "many bugs"? > > Perhaps other than the one I already described and addressed? > > No, João, this is not how it goes. I don't have to prove to you that > your idea introduces bugs. You have to show that mutation of the > completion table strings (which are not supposed to be mutated) will not > lead to bugs, which are hard to find. Please calm down, both of you. No one has to prove anything to anyone here, that's not how Emacs development works. We need to see which idea is better, and if none is significantly better, we will probably have both of them living side by side. And while asking for an example of potential bugs is reasonable, asking for a proof that a change will NOT lead to bugs isn't. So how about a couple of examples where having original strings unchanged is important, which could then be discussed? > >> Note that your idea also does not address the other issues which are > >> addressed by my patch. > > > > That's for sure. My patch idea addresses only that single problem. > > I think this is a good property of patches: to solve one thing, not many. > > No, this is not necessarily true. This is only good if the problem is > solved in a way which is future proof. The idea of mutating the strings > is a hack and not a solution. Just to make sure we are on the same page: adding a text property to a string doesn't mutate a string. Lisp programs that process these strings will not necessarily see any difference, and displaying those strings will also not show any difference if the property is not related to display. So the assumption that seems to be made here, that adding a property is the same as mutating a string, is IMO inaccurate if not incorrect. And once again: please tone down your responses, both of you. TIA.