Re: Overlays as an AA-tree

[Stefan Monnier]

> My point was that if overlay edges are implemented as markers, their
> movement with buffer changes is for free, and doesn't need to be
> reimplemented.

Keeping overlays in a tree means that the tree has to be updated when
overlays move, so "their movement with buffer changes is for free"
doesn't apply.  More to the point, his code makes overlays not use
markers any more (and I agree with this choice).

> in any case, I was only talking about the overlay start/end
> implementation, not about the byte position of markers in general.

I was talking specifically about keeping byte-positions for overlays.


        Stefan