From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: What to do when font-lock-flush + font-lock-ensure do less than font-lock-fontify-buffer? Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2016 18:40:20 +0200 Message-ID: <83k2lwlmvf.fsf@gnu.org> References: <56CA94A8.3000205@gmail.com> <83si0klo3c.fsf@gnu.org> <56CB3756.6000906@gmail.com> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1456159645 15539 80.91.229.3 (22 Feb 2016 16:47:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2016 16:47:25 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: =?utf-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9ment?= Pit--Claudel Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Feb 22 17:47:24 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1aXtdr-0004ou-N0 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 22 Feb 2016 17:47:23 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50185 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aXtdq-0004go-QK for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 22 Feb 2016 11:47:22 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:59691) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aXtXG-0001sH-FQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 22 Feb 2016 11:40:35 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aXtXB-0006Yg-FC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 22 Feb 2016 11:40:34 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:39472) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aXtXB-0006YY-B4; Mon, 22 Feb 2016 11:40:29 -0500 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:1271 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1aXtXA-0004fj-Nj; Mon, 22 Feb 2016 11:40:29 -0500 In-reply-to: <56CB3756.6000906@gmail.com> (message from =?utf-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9?= =?utf-8?Q?ment?= Pit--Claudel on Mon, 22 Feb 2016 11:29:10 -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: 2.1.14 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:200463 Archived-At: > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > From: Clément Pit--Claudel > Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2016 11:29:10 -0500 > > > I think what you describe _is_ the proper way. Can you show a test > > case which demonstrates how calling font-lock-flush followed by > > font-lock-ensure fails to do the job? > > In any case where font-lock-fontified is nil > font-lock-fontify-buffer will properly refontify the whole buffer, > but font-lock-flush and font-lock ensure will not do anything. That's not what I see in the code, that's why I asked for a test case. I'm probably missing something.