From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: A question about overlays and performance. Date: Sun, 26 Jul 2020 10:44:02 -0400 Message-ID: References: <835zabcz8d.fsf@gnu.org> <87365foyam.fsf@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="28713"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: Eli Zaretskii , Jeff Norden , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Ihor Radchenko Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Jul 26 16:45:15 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jzhtr-0007NK-0t for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 26 Jul 2020 16:45:15 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50484 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jzhtq-0002ce-2c for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 26 Jul 2020 10:45:14 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:59616) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jzhsn-0001pW-Hx for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 26 Jul 2020 10:44:09 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:22513) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jzhsk-0004u2-7E; Sun, 26 Jul 2020 10:44:09 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 0B4FA80D86; Sun, 26 Jul 2020 10:44:05 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 638EB80712; Sun, 26 Jul 2020 10:44:03 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1595774643; bh=5Lj3nquw8eSv6oAY85mpMpew8xYK3exZuvA+2+7KOlg=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=RO6a/oHdYwlQinIOyKqvpkJei/rrrZmsmC9IZD15R1EazJ4giSz6iFD7vwAlqrfAP cm65P0EKzUcH9gZSdcKjtoaVMCKIVBRLKSjlsnrx3xGOo88tjQGcrM4w27iLqQ4G9H JkWTDcBSFMlabQKEKirL9k3KajzQOqbk5+CczEAaHTqumgT1rhqLzWKEJftc55vUMl oiZD9k02Opp1Tx17bMj00dZWLvcbF3+7QjvMnFPX4ojpCH3HJ/ehfIdMbBQ4XsSvne La1GMKi4jKqeX9HXUudjRExo/N+a09aWRO7hCZDtFy3rTZx6+TZIE4WMdS6nxCj2pP UH2dKzLCJUlVA== Original-Received: from milanesa (unknown [104.247.229.155]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 24B5E120225; Sun, 26 Jul 2020 10:44:03 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <87365foyam.fsf@localhost> (Ihor Radchenko's message of "Sun, 26 Jul 2020 09:33:21 +0800") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/07/26 10:40:29 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Spam_score_int: -42 X-Spam_score: -4.3 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:253257 Archived-At: > - text hidden via text properties is not well-handled by isearch. For > overlays, isearch can temporary reveal the hidden text, which is not > the case for text hidden using 'invisible text property. The recommending way to avoid this problem is to provide a patch which extends Isearch's handling of invisible text to text-properties. There's no reason to presume it would be hard to do. > - text properties are not buffer-local in indirect buffers. With > overlays, it is possible to have define hidden text in basic and > indirect buffer independently. However, text properties will always be > shared and the text hidden in indirect buffer will automatically be > hidden in the base buffer as well. And the way I recommend to avoid this problem is to stay clear of indirect buffers (which I consider as an attractive nuisance). Stefan