bug#24073: 25.1-rc2

bug#24073: 25.1-rc2

[Paul Rankin]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> on Wed, 31 Aug 2016 17:25 +0300:
> > From: Paul Rankin <hello@paulwrankin.com>
> > Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2016 12:56:13 +1000
> > Cc: 24073@debbugs.gnu.org
> > 
> > >> The fix seems trivial to me so I'm wondering if there is anything holding it 
> > >> up from being included in 25?
> > > 
> > > Yes, the fact that Emacs 25 is for all practical purposes already
> > > released.
> > 
> > Okay. 25.2?
> 
> I don't see why not, provided that Org developers give us their
> blessing.  Please bring this to their attention on the Org list, or
> ask them to speak up here.  I don't want us to make any changes that
> could adversely affect Org without consulting them first.

Dear Org Mode maintainers,

Looping you in on a proposed bug fix for `outline-invisible-p'.

Briefly, the problem is the function returns non-nil for any invisible
text property when it should only do so for the outline property. As a
defsubst, it is difficult to patch for other affected programs.

Diff pasted:

--- /usr/local/Cellar/emacs/25.1-rc2/share/emacs/25.1/lisp/outline.el.gz
+++ #<buffer outline.el.gz>
@@ -388,9 +388,9 @@
 		      nil 'move))
 
 (defsubst outline-invisible-p (&optional pos)
-  "Non-nil if the character after POS is invisible.
+  "Non-nil if the character after POS has outline invisible property.
 If POS is nil, use `point' instead."
-  (get-char-property (or pos (point)) 'invisible))
+  (eq (get-char-property (or pos (point)) 'invisible) 'outline))
 
 (defun outline-back-to-heading (&optional invisible-ok)
   "Move to previous heading line, or beg of this line if it's a heading.

Diff finished.  Sat Sep  3 14:35:22 2016

bug#24073: 25.1-rc2

[Eli Zaretskii]

Ping!

Bastien, could you or someone else please look into this and provide
your comments?  TIA.

> From: Paul Rankin <hello@paulwrankin.com>
> Cc: 24073@debbugs.gnu.org, emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
> Date: Sat, 03 Sep 2016 14:38:55 +1000
> 
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> on Wed, 31 Aug 2016 17:25 +0300:
> > > From: Paul Rankin <hello@paulwrankin.com>
> > > Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2016 12:56:13 +1000
> > > Cc: 24073@debbugs.gnu.org
> > > 
> > > >> The fix seems trivial to me so I'm wondering if there is anything holding it 
> > > >> up from being included in 25?
> > > > 
> > > > Yes, the fact that Emacs 25 is for all practical purposes already
> > > > released.
> > > 
> > > Okay. 25.2?
> > 
> > I don't see why not, provided that Org developers give us their
> > blessing.  Please bring this to their attention on the Org list, or
> > ask them to speak up here.  I don't want us to make any changes that
> > could adversely affect Org without consulting them first.
> 
> Dear Org Mode maintainers,
> 
> Looping you in on a proposed bug fix for `outline-invisible-p'.
> 
> Briefly, the problem is the function returns non-nil for any invisible
> text property when it should only do so for the outline property. As a
> defsubst, it is difficult to patch for other affected programs.
> 
> Diff pasted:
> 
> --- /usr/local/Cellar/emacs/25.1-rc2/share/emacs/25.1/lisp/outline.el.gz
> +++ #<buffer outline.el.gz>
> @@ -388,9 +388,9 @@
>  		      nil 'move))
>  
>  (defsubst outline-invisible-p (&optional pos)
> -  "Non-nil if the character after POS is invisible.
> +  "Non-nil if the character after POS has outline invisible property.
>  If POS is nil, use `point' instead."
> -  (get-char-property (or pos (point)) 'invisible))
> +  (eq (get-char-property (or pos (point)) 'invisible) 'outline))
>  
>  (defun outline-back-to-heading (&optional invisible-ok)
>    "Move to previous heading line, or beg of this line if it's a heading.
> 
> Diff finished.  Sat Sep  3 14:35:22 2016
> 

bug#24073: 25.1-rc2

[Nicolas Goaziou]

Hello,

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

> Bastien, could you or someone else please look into this and provide
> your comments?  TIA.

This fix looks fine, obviously. You can go ahead as far as Org is
concerned.

Thank you for letting us know.

Regards,

-- 
Nicolas Goaziou

Re: bug#24073: 25.1-rc2

[Bastien Guerry]

Nicolas Goaziou <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr> writes:

> This fix looks fine, obviously. You can go ahead as far as Org is
> concerned.

+1

-- 
 Bastien