Re: Behavior of input method -- crdt.el

[Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>]

> After resolving the position of the changes, crdt.el move point
> to the resolved position and use INSERT to insert the characters
> from remote peer.
> In the case that these other changes happen to at exactly the same
> position that current user is inserting using input method, seems that
> the input method get confused and consider those inserted character
> as part of its halfway input. It doesn’t affect character selection, but
> when user finally select a character, it erase both the halfway input
> and the inserted remote characters.

So far so good: the behavior is not what the user intended, but it's
still just a sequence of insertions and deletions, with a conflict due
to simultaneous edits.  So the user can/should undo and then retype
the character.

> Now the peers are inconsistent.

Why?  Why isn't the exact same erroneous erase+insert propagated to the
other peers?


        Stefan