Re: how to prevent font-lock from messing with a portion of text?

[Stefan Monnier]

>> >     (while (< here end1)
>> >       (unless (get-text-property here 'font-lock-ignore object)
>> >         (put-text-property here (1+ here) property value object))
>> >       (setq here (1+ here)))))
>> 
>> This will still override a face on a word inside a string, because
>> (get-text-property <string-start> 'font-lock-ignore object) will be nil.
>> You need to check for the presence of the property over the whole
>> start..end region.

> I have a string in an emacs-lisp-mode buffer. I highlight a word in the
> string using property `face' and I put property `font-lock-ignore' on it
> also. I turn font-lock on and off - the word highlighting stays. I modify
> the file and save it - the word highlighting stays. I highlight the whole
> string, or more than a word, with the highlighting starting or ending on or
> off a word boundary - the highlighting stays. I don't see the problem you
> mention.

Sorry, I misread your code.  I didn't pay attention to your loop.
Boy, this is way too inefficient.  You can make it a bit better using
next-property-change, at least.
But still, the performance impact is a problem, because the benefit is
so small.

> I already spoke to performance. I don't claim that the above code is
> optimized. I intended it to show in general terms what I meant, so there
> was no misunderstanding about that.

There's no misunderstanding.

>> OK, here's another option: don't change anything to font-lock, don't
>> fiddle with it at all, just don't use text-properties to add your special
>> faces.  Use overlays instead. Problem solved

> As I said, my own highlighting library uses overlays by default. But
> sometimes text properties are useful. Facemenu is one example.

I don't see any reason why facemenu should use text-properties rather than
overlays.

> As it stands now, any application that uses the `face' text property gets
> that highlighting trampled on by font lock - there is no simple way for an
> application to prevent that. That, to me, is undesirable.

We all agree.  The differnece is whether we consider it sufficiently serious
to warrant action and performance penalties.


        Stefan