[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Invisibility bug: `invisible' vs `display'

From: Daniel Brockman
Subject: Re: Invisibility bug: `invisible' vs `display'
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 14:23:34 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.92 (gnu/linux)

David Kastrup <address@hidden> writes:

> Daniel Brockman <address@hidden> writes:
>> David Kastrup <address@hidden> writes:
>>> They apply to the region between its buffer positions.  Which is
>>> usually pretty similar to "characters under the overlay".  But
>>> zero-length overlays exist and work, too, and when copying text
>>> from a buffer, overlay properties are not copied as part of the
>>> text.
>> I can't get zero-length overlays to display anything using
>> the `display' property.  Here's what I'm doing:
>>    (overlay-put (make-overlay (point) (point)) 'display "foo")
> Hm.  Weird.  It works using before-string and after-string, though.
> Looking at preview-latex, it actually moves stuff from 'display to
> 'before-string in the zero-length case.

Okay.  However --- and I guess for the record, --- I can't
see that the display patch affects this in any way.

     (insert "foo")
     (overlay-put (make-overlay (point) (point)) 'after-string "bar")
     (insert (propertize "baz" 'invisible t))

The above displays the same with and without the patch.
Likewise for `before-string'.

> This can probably can well be considered a bug, but it is a bug that
> has been around for eternities, so we are not going to win much
> applause trying to fix it before the release.
> Afterwards, however, should be a good time to tackle this
> inconsistency along with the others.

I agree that it could be considered a bug.

Daniel Brockman <address@hidden>

reply via email to

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