Re: Todays exercise of sanity (or does "see" really match "not"?)

[David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>]

Juri Linkov <juri@jurta.org> writes:

> David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:
>> Please don't.  I can't see any advantage of breaking working packages
>> right now for no currently apparent significant practical advantage.
>
> I agree that handling the `display' property in a way similar to the
> `invisible' property could break existing packages.  The rules for
> handling invisible text are quite complex and include invisibility
> specifications in `buffer-invisibility-spec'.  Changing them to
> support the `display' property would be too drastic change.
>
> With the current code one of the following methods can be used
> to make isearch to skip text under the `display' property:
>
> 1. Set both `invisible' and `display' properties.  It seems the
>    display engine ignores the `invisible' property when the `display'
>    property is present.  But isearch still respects it.

This is definitely the correct solution.  If one really wants to have
the display property itself invisible (for whatever obscure reason),
then one should set the invisibility properties on the display
property's string.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum