From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Daniel Brockman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Invisibility bug: `invisible' vs `display' Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 02:09:30 +0100 Message-ID: <87hctq6eyd.fsf@wigwam.brockman.se> References: <87sldbtd50.fsf@wigwam.brockman.se> <87hctraqhh.fsf@stupidchicken.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1171329015 2723 80.91.229.12 (13 Feb 2007 01:10:15 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 01:10:15 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Feb 13 02:10:09 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HGmBM-0006nY-4h for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 13 Feb 2007 02:10:08 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HGmBL-0000Lm-JO for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 12 Feb 2007 20:10:07 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HGmBA-0000LZ-Fc for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Feb 2007 20:09:56 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HGmB8-0000LN-R0 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Feb 2007 20:09:55 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HGmB8-0000LK-Mf for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Feb 2007 20:09:54 -0500 Original-Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2] helo=ciao.gmane.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA:32) (Exim 4.52) id 1HGmB8-0002Jv-Aa for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Feb 2007 20:09:54 -0500 Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1HGmAy-00058a-UX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 13 Feb 2007 02:09:44 +0100 Original-Received: from c-a4fee255.09-32-6c6b7013.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se ([85.226.254.164]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2007 02:09:44 +0100 Original-Received: from daniel by c-a4fee255.09-32-6c6b7013.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2007 02:09:44 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 25 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: c-a4fee255.09-32-6c6b7013.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se X-Face: :&2UWGm>e24)ip~'K@iOsA&JT3JX*v@1-#L)=dUb825\Fwg#`^N!Y*g-TqdS AevzjFJe96f@V'ya8${57/T'"mTd`1o{TGYhHnVucLq!D$r2O{IN)7>.0op_Y`%r;/Q +(]`3F-t10N7NF\.Mm0q}p1:%iqTi:5]1E]rDF)R$9.!,Eu'9K':y9^U3F8UCS1M+A$ 8[[[WT^`$P[vu>P+8]aQMh9giu&fPCqLW2FSsGs User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/23.0.51 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:whGg5DiQIR5Ij/TnDpeq9G3/fVw= X-detected-kernel: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:66323 Archived-At: Chong Yidong writes: > Daniel Brockman writes: > >> The `*' and `?' characters have `invisibile' properties >> with a value of `t', so I expect to see none of them. >> >> The `?' characters all have `display' properties with a >> value of "!" (one of them has "$" instead, for clarity). >> This, I believe, _should_ be irrelevant. > > The `display' text property overrides `invisible'. If that were true, then all the `?' characters should display as exclamation marks, but they don't, so the `display' text property does not override `invisible'. This still looks like a bug to me. Let me state again what I see: The `display' property overrides `invisible' if and only if the previous character is visible. How is this reasonable or useful in any way? -- Daniel Brockman