[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

bug#18285: 24.3.92; A combination of `display' on text and `invisible' a

From: Dmitry Gutov
Subject: bug#18285: 24.3.92; A combination of `display' on text and `invisible' and `before/after-string' leads to the before/after string being displayed twice
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2014 15:41:51 +0400
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.0

On 08/22/2014 10:41 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:

I have no idea how rare it will be.  FWIW, for the past year, all the
display-related bugs are for pretty rare cases.  What does that tell
you about user expectations?

I dunno. Something's changing? For example, I've encountered this specific bug now because the `report-emacs-bug' buffer uses `display' in Emacs 24.4, but 24.3 used `intangible' there.

(And only after I've fixed another `display'-related bug in Company popup rendering.)

Anyway, how about the other way around? I'll like this less, but why not
make `invisible' inactive when `display' is set?

That's what Emacs does already.  The only place where invisible still
matters in this situation is when deciding how and where to display
overlay strings.  I thought I explained that earlier in this thread.

So, why not make it matter less? "If display is set, don't interpret invisible" should be a straightforward piece of logic.

If `display' takes priority over `invisible', I would expect

(let ((pt (point)))
  (insert (propertize "a" 'display "bbb"))
  (let ((o (make-overlay pt (point))))
    (overlay-put o 'after-string "foo\nbar")))


(let ((pt (point)))
  (insert (propertize "a" 'display "bbb"))
  (let ((o (make-overlay pt (point))))
    (overlay-put o 'invisible t)
    (overlay-put o 'after-string "foo\nbar")))

to be rendered the same.

My opinion is that users and Lisp programmers should not enter these
dark corners.

Yeah, maybe.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]