[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Is there something like `on-display-functions'?

From: Eli Zaretskii
Subject: Re: Is there something like `on-display-functions'?
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 22:08:18 +0200

> From: Stefan Monnier <address@hidden>
> Cc: Alan Mackenzie <address@hidden>,  address@hidden
> Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 14:24:18 -0500
> >> > I'd recommend you use jit-lock instead (via jit-lock-register), tho,
> >> > because fontification-functions (despite its name) really only works
> >> > well with a single function (at least I don't know how to make it work
> >> > well with more than one, based on how it's currently defined).
> >> Is that because it's got to set 'fontified' properties?
> Yes.

I see that I misunderstood what Alan was asking, and answered the
wrong question.  Sorry.

> The problem is to figure out which of the functions should set this
> property

As you see from the fragment I posted, the functions are invoked in
strict order of the list.  So I guess the last one should do this?

> and over which part of the buffer, since that property
> should only be applied to the part of the buffer that's fontified by
> all the functions (if the first functions fontifies 256 chars at a
> time and the second 1000 chars at a time, the property should only
> be set on the first 256 bytes).

Sorry, I still don't get this: why do you need several functions that
fontify different stretches of text, and why only the first stretch
should be marked as fontified.  Could you please tell some more about
the context?

reply via email to

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