[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Can we make set_point_both less expensive?

From: Daniel Colascione
Subject: Re: Can we make set_point_both less expensive?
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 11:18:58 -0700
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0

On 03/16/2015 11:05 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> From: Stefan Monnier <address@hidden>
>> Cc: address@hidden, address@hidden
>> Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 13:36:40 -0400
>>>> what users of those features normally want is to catch movement of
>>>> the cursor
>>> You mean, we should do this in redisplay?
>> Probably in pre-redisplay-hook or in pre/post-command-hook, yes.
> That contradicts the "catch movement of cursor" idea: redisplay could
> well move point from where it is found before redisplay, as you know.

When does that matter? The intent is to get editing to behave _as if_
invisible regions were intangible, and the existing invisible motion
behavior seems mostly up to the task.

(There's a problem where point remains inside invisible text if text
around point is made newly invisible without moving point.)

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

reply via email to

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