Re: Overalays and point-entered

[Nathaniel Flath]

On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 4:55 PM, Stefan Monnier <address@hidden> wrote:

> Since the main point I was implementing this was so I could add these
> properties to overlay, I'd prefer a solution that works better with them.

Yes, I understand that, and I agree it should work well with overlays
as well.

> Would it be better to store overlays at point at the end of this loop, and
> use this instead of looking up old points?

Might be, yes.

> To solve the boundary-control issue, I could look at get-pos-property
> and use the same mechanism it does for controlling boundary behaviour.

Yes, you'd need to implement a get-overlays-at-pos.
       Stefan

Actually, instead of this, why not add an extra optional argument that defaults to nil to get-pos-property?  If the argument is non-nil, get-pos-property would return a list of the values named property at pos instead of just one of them.  This way wouldn't  duplicate boundary-checking functionality.

Thanks,
Nathaniel Flath