From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Feature request : Tab-completion for 'shell-comand' Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 23:24:03 -0400 Message-ID: References: <874pbmjgsy.fsf@gmx.de> <874pbknt3j.fsf@tsuchiya.vaj.namazu.org> <87mypccg6r.fsf@jurta.org> <87abl8svpl.fsf@jurta.org> <87iqzves3k.fsf@jurta.org> <87zlt6qnu4.fsf@jurta.org> <8763vs7v08.fsf@jurta.org> <87d4pzz56f.fsf@jurta.org> <47D97A36.5050103@gmx.at> <47DA2D50.5050101@gmx.at> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1205552075 6690 80.91.229.12 (15 Mar 2008 03:34:35 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2008 03:34:35 +0000 (UTC) Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: martin rudalics Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Mar 15 04:35:03 2008 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 1JaNAi-0002l9-Dh for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 15 Mar 2008 04:35:00 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JaNA9-0008Md-3Z for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 14 Mar 2008 23:34:25 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JaN0B-0003WE-FJ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Mar 2008 23:24:07 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JaN09-0003VE-3C for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Mar 2008 23:24:07 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JaN08-0003V5-Te for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Mar 2008 23:24:04 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JaN08-0003gJ-G9 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Mar 2008 23:24:04 -0400 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1JaN07-0004Qo-6v; Fri, 14 Mar 2008 23:24:03 -0400 In-reply-to: <47DA2D50.5050101@gmx.at> (message from martin rudalics on Fri, 14 Mar 2008 08:46:24 +0100) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: 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:92652 Archived-At: The doc-string of `remove-overlays' is not useful in this regard - its first sentence is silly. But `remove-overlays' relies on `overlays-in' and the latter's doc-string is precise. A zero-length overlay located at the (implicit) END arg of `remove-overlays' should _not_ get deleted unless it's located at the (implicit) BEG too. Perhaps remove-overlays should have an argument controlling how to interpret END. I think often people will want to delete zero-lenth overlays at END, and often they won't.