[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: overlay-start > overlay-end
From: |
Richard Stallman |
Subject: |
Re: overlay-start > overlay-end |
Date: |
Wed, 24 Mar 2004 00:34:25 -0500 |
Thank you for suggestion. I found a function for the
purpose: fix_overlays_in_range. I put it inside
`fix_overlays_before'. Instead I put it to the upper
level function.
Thanks. That is correct, but maybe another change is needed too.
I saw this comment at fix_overlays_in_range:
Such an overlay might even have negative size at this point.
If so, we'll reverse the endpoints. Can you think of anything
better to do in this situation? */
That is the wrong thing to do! These overlays should be empty.
Can you fix that too?
fix_overlays_in_range => fix_start_end_in_overlays
That seems like a good idea.
fix_overlays_before => fix_order_of_overlays_in_buffer
That name is too clumsy, I'd say don't change this one.
- Using overlay in register, Masatake YAMATO, 2004/03/18
- Re: Using overlay in register, Richard Stallman, 2004/03/19
- Re: Using overlay in register, Masatake YAMATO, 2004/03/21
- Re: Using overlay in register, Richard Stallman, 2004/03/22
- overlay-start > overlay-end, Masatake YAMATO, 2004/03/22
- Re: overlay-start > overlay-end, Richard Stallman, 2004/03/22
- Re: overlay-start > overlay-end, Masatake YAMATO, 2004/03/23
- Re: overlay-start > overlay-end, Stefan Monnier, 2004/03/23
- Re: overlay-start > overlay-end,
Richard Stallman <=
- Re: Using overlay in register, Richard Stallman, 2004/03/22