[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Can we make set_point_both less expensive?
From: |
martin rudalics |
Subject: |
Re: Can we make set_point_both less expensive? |
Date: |
Fri, 20 Mar 2015 20:53:59 +0100 |
>> Then the second incarnation of p-r-f will have to move the window's
>> point to the start or end of the intangible area, whichever is nearer
>> to the window point established by redisplay. Or do I miss something?
>
> More important than "nearer" would be "after window-start and before
> window-end" to avoid inf-looping.
Yes. As I said before: "Handling the intangible property makes IMO
sense only after redisplay has determined the start/point/end positions
of the window."
>
>> Strictly spoken I see no reason why the display engine should not handle
>> that property by itself.
>
> It's complicated enough as it is.
Maybe you're right.
martin
- Re: Can we make set_point_both less expensive?, (continued)
- Re: Can we make set_point_both less expensive?, Eli Zaretskii, 2015/03/21
- Re: Can we make set_point_both less expensive?, martin rudalics, 2015/03/21
- Re: Can we make set_point_both less expensive?, Stefan Monnier, 2015/03/21
- Re: Can we make set_point_both less expensive?, martin rudalics, 2015/03/21
- Re: Can we make set_point_both less expensive?, Eli Zaretskii, 2015/03/21
- Re: Can we make set_point_both less expensive?, martin rudalics, 2015/03/21
- Re: Can we make set_point_both less expensive?, Eli Zaretskii, 2015/03/21
- Re: Can we make set_point_both less expensive?, Stefan Monnier, 2015/03/20
- Re: Can we make set_point_both less expensive?,
martin rudalics <=
- Re: Can we make set_point_both less expensive?, Richard Stallman, 2015/03/17
- Re: Can we make set_point_both less expensive?, Yuri Khan, 2015/03/17
- Re: Can we make set_point_both less expensive?, Eli Zaretskii, 2015/03/17
- Re: Can we make set_point_both less expensive?, Richard Stallman, 2015/03/18