Re: Display problems with `before-string' in overlay

[Lennart Borgman (gmail)]

Nick Roberts wrote:
>  > In other words: I have seen this bug.
>
> I'm not questioning that you have seen it, just the wisdom of ignoring the
> advice of those who are experts in that part of the code and say that it is
> dangerous to fix shortly before the release.

I am not ignoring Kim's advice, neither am I ignoring Richard's advice 
here. And I have listened to Chong.

If you read my messages carefully you will see why I do not think this 
is dangerous to fix the way I have suggested. This is what I wrote to 
Kim some hours ago (who if I understand correctly is suspecting that a 
slightly different way to fix it is better in the long run):

"The advantage of this way (my fix) is that it is rather safe. In 
essence it just switches the value "or-ed" with row->continued_p between 
that your a little bit unfortunate patch gave (ie t) and the previous 
value (ie nil).

Both these values have been tested for quite a while so it does not look 
as there can much stability problems."

> Given that you appear to be the only one to have been inconvenienced by this
> bug (and how often do you need an overlay at the start of the buffer?) while
> probably thousands want to see a release, and thousands more want to see
> Unicode added to Emacs, I just find the whole thing absurd.  Some things
> are worth dying for, but I don't this is one of them.

Oh, good, I am delaying the Unicode release! I did not think of that.

Sorry, I could not really resist. I can understand your frustration, 
this makes me frustrated too, but I have tried my best not to delay the 
release. I believe the fix I sent today and that Chong turned into 
something more well written does what is needed.