[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#18367: 24.4.50; [PATCH] Text property `font-lock-ignore', to protect
bug#18367: 24.4.50; [PATCH] Text property `font-lock-ignore', to protect from font-lock
Sun, 31 Aug 2014 13:56:29 -0700 (PDT)
> >> Could you add a short explanation for why font-lock-face is
> >> not sufficient?
> > Sorry, but I don't know why it might be imagined sufficient.
> Can you please just answer the damn question?
Can you please control your nastiness?
I answered your "damn" question to the best of my ability, trying
to guess what you mean by it. I do not claim to be an expert
on `font-lock-face', and I did not mention it in my bug report.
I have no idea why you think `font-lock-face' is sufficient
for the feature I requested - how (you think) it provides it.
I'm not a mind reader.
I listed several ways in which (I think) `font-lock-face' is
unrelated to the feature and does not provide it. Apparently
that is not enough for you.
In that case, please say how you see `font-lock-face' as being
sufficient to provide the feature. What, in your eyes, is
the relation between `font-lock-face' and the requested feature?
If you do that then I will hopefully understand what you have
in mind, and I will hopefully be able to show why I think you
are wrong (i.e., show why `font-lock-face' is not sufficient),
in the terms you will have expressed.
Or perhaps then I will agree with you that `font-lock-face'
is sufficient to realize the feature. But without your saying
anything about what you mean, I cannot speak more to your vague
(and now nasty) inquiry.
So far, nothing from you - only heat, no light.