From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Display-based word wrapping Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2008 14:58:36 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87k5gen1vn.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87od5qd2x3.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87ej6mxzzp.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87mylab77x.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <874p7hgz5r.fsf@stupidchicken.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1214420331 20728 80.91.229.12 (25 Jun 2008 18:58:51 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2008 18:58:51 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Chong Yidong Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jun 25 20:59:35 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 1KBaDO-0002dS-TO for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 25 Jun 2008 20:59:35 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47914 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KBaCZ-0000w0-D9 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 25 Jun 2008 14:58:43 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KBaCU-0000vc-50 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 25 Jun 2008 14:58:38 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KBaCT-0000vM-6F for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 25 Jun 2008 14:58:37 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=56843 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KBaCT-0000vJ-3N for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 25 Jun 2008 14:58:37 -0400 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.182]:29454) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KBaCS-000836-NC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 25 Jun 2008 14:58:36 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AiYFAKAxYkhFxIdG/2dsb2JhbACBW7IWgW4 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.27,703,1204520400"; d="scan'208";a="23200859" Original-Received: from 69-196-135-70.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO pastel.home) ([69.196.135.70]) by ironport2-out.teksavvy.com with ESMTP; 25 Jun 2008 14:58:36 -0400 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 3519C8130; Wed, 25 Jun 2008 14:58:36 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <874p7hgz5r.fsf@stupidchicken.com> (Chong Yidong's message of "Wed, 25 Jun 2008 14:14:24 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. 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:99943 Archived-At: > What I'm questioning is whether it's truly a 3-state situation. From > the point of view of the redisplay engine, yes, it's just three > different ways of wrapping. But from the point of view of the Lisp > interface, it may be more convenient to regard word-wrap and char-wrap > are two different styles of line continuation, and to draw an additional > distinction between line continuation and line truncation. Because then > the semantic role of truncate-partial-width-windows and > toggle-truncate-lines would be unchanged: if lines are not truncated, > they are continued, and the word-wrap variable determines how that > continuation occurs. Yes, I guess that makes sense as well, Stefan