From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Drew Adams" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#8626: 24.0.50; (elisp) Region to Fontify after a Buffer Change - Why a child of Multiline Font Lock? Date: Fri, 6 May 2011 08:00:50 -0700 Message-ID: <86CA0AD6E28C4F9687E6B9F09D00218B@us.oracle.com> References: <078B0330CA3C43959F4638AC9055DB76@us.oracle.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1304694132 21045 80.91.229.12 (6 May 2011 15:02:12 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 6 May 2011 15:02:12 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 8626@debbugs.gnu.org To: "'Stefan Monnier'" Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri May 06 17:02:07 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QIMXf-0003dx-28 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 06 May 2011 17:02:07 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:55380 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QIMXe-0004Sw-KJ for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 06 May 2011 11:02:06 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:54491) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QIMXb-0004Sm-M2 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 06 May 2011 11:02:04 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QIMXa-0001n0-Lc for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 06 May 2011 11:02:03 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:37115) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QIMXa-0001mv-Eb for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 06 May 2011 11:02:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QIMXZ-0005vV-TH; Fri, 06 May 2011 11:02:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: "Drew Adams" Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-To: owner@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 06 May 2011 15:02:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 8626 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 8626-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B8626.130469406322707 (code B ref 8626); Fri, 06 May 2011 15:02:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 8626) by debbugs.gnu.org; 6 May 2011 15:01:03 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QIMWd-0005uC-8L for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 06 May 2011 11:01:03 -0400 Original-Received: from rcsinet10.oracle.com ([148.87.113.121]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QIMWa-0005ti-VS for 8626@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 06 May 2011 11:01:01 -0400 Original-Received: from rcsinet13.oracle.com (rcsinet13.oracle.com [148.87.113.125]) by rcsinet10.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.2/Switch-3.4.2) with ESMTP id p46F0qGa012865 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 6 May 2011 15:00:54 GMT Original-Received: from acsmt357.oracle.com (acsmt357.oracle.com [141.146.40.157]) by rcsinet13.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.2/Switch-3.4.1) with ESMTP id p46F0pJs001060 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 6 May 2011 15:00:52 GMT Original-Received: from abhmt010.oracle.com (abhmt010.oracle.com [141.146.116.19]) by acsmt357.oracle.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id p46F0pAF009202; Fri, 6 May 2011 10:00:51 -0500 Original-Received: from dradamslap1 (/10.159.62.197) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Fri, 06 May 2011 08:00:50 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: Thread-Index: AcwL/GkbFWOfvx0iRymjcUTjPyCLZgAAEZrg X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6090 X-Source-IP: rcsinet13.oracle.com [148.87.113.125] X-Auth-Type: Internal IP X-CT-RefId: str=0001.0A090207.4DC40D26.0140:SCFMA4539811,ss=1,fgs=0 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Fri, 06 May 2011 11:02:01 -0400 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) 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:46277 Archived-At: > > What limits the import of this node to multiline font-lock? > > Nothing that I can see. > > Maybe the problem is "your" notion of "multiline font-lock"? > > There's no such thing as a "multiline font-lock" feature or > functionality, but only "Multiline Font Lock Constructs", > i.e. there are cases where a major mode needs to get font-lock > to recognize elements that span multiple lines. That _is_ "my" notion of "multiline font-lock" (and that's your term, not mine). > > This node is about refontification after buffer changes. It is not, > > logically, a subnode of `Multiline Font Lock Constructs'. > > It is about having to extend the refontification area because > refontifying a single-line is not sufficient, presumably because the > major mode has to handle a multiline font-lock construct. The node _says_ it is about what you say up to the comma. You then add "presumably...", which is _not_ part of the node content. This info is missing. Also missing is whether anything stronger than "presumably" applies. The node content is about the region to refontify after a buffer change. It mentions that in some cases code might need to extend that region, to DTRT. That's all that is said. If the _only_ time this is pertinent is in the context of multiline font-lock constructs, then please say so (and perhaps why, if helpful). If it is not the only time, then add that this _can_ happen, in particular, in the context of multiline font-lock constructs. You seem to be fighting making this text clear. Please clearly specify how and how much the (current) node content is related to multiline font-lock constructs. That's what is missing.