[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: moving point over invisible and intangible text
From: |
Luc Teirlinck |
Subject: |
Re: moving point over invisible and intangible text |
Date: |
Wed, 15 Oct 2003 20:55:34 -0500 (CDT) |
Stefan Monnier wrote:
Please try to convince the Gnus team not to use `intangible'.
Do you mean "not to use `intangible' in combination with `invisible'"
or do you mean "not to use `intangible', period"?
It's a pretty sure way to get into odd problems (the problem being that
`intangible' works at a very low-level and leads to really unexpected
behavior such as (goto-char N) not going to position N).
Just using `invisible' is usually sufficient.
Yes, but what if one wants to use `intangible' without using
`invisible'? You seem to imply that the changes you made to the
treatment of the invisibility property mean that Elisp authors now can
rest assured that (goto-char N) is _definitely_ going to go to
position N. Of course not. People can still use the intangibility
property and, moreover, there are other reasons why (goto-char N) will
not necessarily go to position N (narrowing, size of buffer and so
on). Why is the fact that (goto-char N) does not unconditionally go
to position N "really unexpected"? It happens all the time.
Sincerely,
Luc.
Re: moving point over invisible and intangible text, Klaus Zeitler, 2003/10/15
Re: moving point over invisible and intangible text,
Luc Teirlinck <=
Re: moving point over invisible and intangible text, Kim F. Storm, 2003/10/16
Re: moving point over invisible and intangible text, Stefan Monnier, 2003/10/16
Re: moving point over invisible and intangible text, Richard Stallman, 2003/10/17
Re: moving point over invisible and intangible text, Kenichi Handa, 2003/10/17
Re: moving point over invisible and intangible text, Stefan Monnier, 2003/10/16
Re: moving point over invisible and intangible text, Richard Stallman, 2003/10/17