From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Miles Bader Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Question about copy-region-as-kill Date: 07 Apr 2002 15:53:09 +0900 Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <87bscwc84q.fsf@tc-1-100.kawasaki.gol.ne.jp> References: <87ofh09xjq.fsf@alice.dynodns.net> <200204050602.g3562Dl18586@aztec.santafe.edu> <87bscx7rlf.fsf@alice.dynodns.net> <200204061732.g36HWSb19584@aztec.santafe.edu> <87k7rkmuk0.fsf@alice.dynodns.net> <87zo0gbfb2.fsf@emacswiki.org> <1018138376.27236.49.camel@space-ghost> <87bscwe36t.fsf@tc-1-100.kawasaki.gol.ne.jp> <874rio5ide.fsf@alice.dynodns.net> <1018154686.1186.13.camel@space-ghost> <87ofgwcdgm.fsf@tc-1-100.kawasaki.gol.ne.jp> <1018157567.1186.15.camel@space-ghost> Reply-To: Miles Bader NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1018162642 13422 127.0.0.1 (7 Apr 2002 06:57:22 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2002 06:57:22 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 16u6c5-0003UN-00 for ; Sun, 07 Apr 2002 08:57:21 +0200 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 16u6pt-0005l9-00 for ; Sun, 07 Apr 2002 09:11:38 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 16u6bt-0004Go-00; Sun, 07 Apr 2002 01:57:09 -0500 Original-Received: from smtp02.fields.gol.com ([203.216.5.132]) by fencepost.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 16u6aQ-0004Es-00; Sun, 07 Apr 2002 01:55:38 -0500 Original-Received: from tc-2-199.kawasaki.gol.ne.jp ([203.216.25.199] helo=tc-1-100.kawasaki.gol.ne.jp) by smtp02.fields.gol.com with esmtp (Magnetic Fields) id 16u6aN-0003B6-00; Sun, 07 Apr 2002 15:55:36 +0900 Original-Received: by tc-1-100.kawasaki.gol.ne.jp (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 3CDFB3054; Sun, 7 Apr 2002 15:53:09 +0900 (JST) Original-To: Colin Walters System-Type: i686-pc-linux-gnu In-Reply-To: <1018157567.1186.15.camel@space-ghost> Original-Lines: 41 X-Abuse-Complaints: abuse@gol.com Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.8 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:2445 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:2445 Colin Walters writes: > My point is that in this case overlays aren't being used for > their primary purpose: specificity to the current buffer. I don't think the concept of a `primary purpose' is all that useful, since it's rather objective; the original reason may be different that current thinking, and one person's view may differ from another's. >From my point of view, the _most_ important thing about overlays is that they are distinct objects that are distinct from the text, and interact with text properties and other overlays. This gives them certain advantages: an overlay can be quickly and easily be moved or removed as a unit, possibly affecting many individual properties; you can discover where a certain property came from, and find other properties in the same overlay (even if they are otherwise hidden by other overlays); you can have `layers' of properties that interact. However most of attributes are _disadvantages_ in many cases, where you really just want to attach properties to the text; for such cases, text properties are much more straightforward and easy to understand. Not surprisingly, the particular advantages of overlays are most useful for very dynamic properties (e.g. a highlighted region) that (surprise) `overlay' the text. [for this reason, it doesn't seem particularly useful to have overlays be copyable like text properties; in my experience overlays are often referred chiefly by an external reference (e.g., a buffer-local variable). > What I am trying to show is that the distinction between text > properties and overlays is arbitrary. Or at least it certainly has > been in my experience. I think you're quite wrong. -Miles -- `...the Soviet Union was sliding in to an economic collapse so comprehensive that in the end its factories produced not goods but bads: finished products less valuable than the raw materials they were made from.' [The Economist]