From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#25592: Feature request: sorting overlays Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2017 19:13:39 +0200 Message-ID: <83mvdx6i0s.fsf@gnu.org> References: <837f5avzdm.fsf@gnu.org> <75813a2b-ba63-e356-d766-cd9ae77b28e2@live.com> <83mve4uxwr.fsf@gnu.org> <83tw8bt1mh.fsf@gnu.org> <1d90ade3-b0a4-f07a-d424-b052a68fd4a7@live.com> <83r33etluz.fsf@gnu.org> <21abc5a1-0777-cd33-ff26-2cd0853e9161@live.com> <83wpd47aqi.fsf@gnu.org> <31fe1609-78eb-6a03-762e-431fd7cfd987@live.com> <83o9yg77a4.fsf@gnu.org> <8be0ce54-f490-556b-4d84-3c1c9a146e34@live.com> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1486487653 12023 195.159.176.226 (7 Feb 2017 17:14:13 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2017 17:14:13 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 25592@debbugs.gnu.org To: =?UTF-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9ment?= Pit--Claudel Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Feb 07 18:14:09 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@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 1cb9LD-0002kn-2F for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 18:14:07 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:55550 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cb9LH-0005fA-3m for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 12:14:11 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41374) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cb9LB-0005eu-C5 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 12:14:06 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cb9L8-0000ji-0l for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 12:14:05 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:32777) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cb9L7-0000je-Tf for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 12:14:01 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cb9L7-0004Sf-OY for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 12:14:01 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2017 17:14:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 25592 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 25592-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B25592.148648763217128 (code B ref 25592); Tue, 07 Feb 2017 17:14:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 25592) by debbugs.gnu.org; 7 Feb 2017 17:13:52 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59209 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cb9Ky-0004SC-Lc for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 12:13:52 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:50163) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cb9Kx-0004Rz-47 for 25592@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 12:13:51 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cb9Ko-0008VJ-Iu for 25592@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 12:13:45 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:42495) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cb9Ko-0008V3-Fo; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 12:13:42 -0500 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:1887 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1cb9Km-000649-Ot; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 12:13:41 -0500 In-reply-to: <8be0ce54-f490-556b-4d84-3c1c9a146e34@live.com> (message from =?UTF-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9ment?= Pit--Claudel on Sun, 5 Feb 2017 14:51:55 -0500) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 208.118.235.43 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:129084 Archived-At: > Cc: 25592@debbugs.gnu.org > From: Clément Pit--Claudel > Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2017 14:51:55 -0500 > > >>> What will happen if you have 2 overlays like this: > >>> > >>> +------------- OV2 -------+ > >>> xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > >>> +------- OV1 ---------+ > >>> > >>> and OV2 has a higher priority than OV1? > >> > >> The two overlays get sorted as (OV1 OV2). > > > > But OV2 has a higher priority, so it should be the first in the sorted > > order, no? > > I process them in order of increasing priority, so OV1 gets processed first. So you actually apply _all_ of the overlays in the buffer, one by one? That's really inefficient. With my proposal, you'd only need to apply at most one overlay at each position where some overlay begins or ends, and do that for much fewer text segments.