Re: indirect-region (make-indirect-buffer) breaks major-mode fontification

[Lennart Borgman]

On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 8:53 PM, Yves Senn <yves.senn@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Of course there are a lot of features I don't use embedded into emacs.
> But I try not to drop loads of third party code into my configurations when I 
> just need
> a little piece. Its like installing eclipse to edit xml files but I guess 
> thats just my opinion.


No, some people think this way. Others think it is good to get the whole nXhtml.

I have just decided I do not have time to distribute it in pieces. A
lot of people would get their setup wrong. Using multi major modes is
a bit more complicated if you do it yourself.


> The buffer approach is very simple. It lets me write a function that
> lets me edit a part from one buffer in another one with another major-mode.
>
> That would completely accomplish the goal to edit parts with another mode
> and would also allow me to use the features provided by the given mode.
>
>>
>> Maybe you just want to use narrowing in Emacs to edit a part of a buffer?
>
> I use narrowing a lot but it does not allow me to change the current 
> major-mode.
> Another thing, that "indirect" buffers allow me is to edit those parts all at 
> once in different windows.
>
> I know it is not the best solution but for the few occurrences when I am 
> doing html prototyping or SSJS
> it would be enough for sure.


Yes, it can work in many cases. Sometimes the rest of the buffer
interferes so you do not get the syntax hilighting you expect. The
same for indentation.


> Integrated is probably the wrong term. I mean that I am heading for a simple 
> solution
> using the on board mechanisms from emacs (indirect buffers) in this case.


It is perhaps good to try. A lot of people have done so, but after a
while they discover that it does not work as they expected. (That was
how I started too.)


>>> I hope I could make it more clear to you what I tried to mention in my
>>> response.
>>
>>
>> Thanks for trying.
>
> After that discussion I think I will give nXhtml an other shot. When I got 
> some spare
> time I will look more into nXhtml and will send you my thoughts.


Ok, there is a new beta now at

  http://ourcomments.org/Emacs/DL/elisp/nxhtml/beta/

This has support for server side javascript. Just do

  M-x ssjs-html-mumamo-mode

to turn it on.


> Regards,
> Senny
>
>
>>
>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Senny
>>>
>>> Am 17.11.2009 um 16:13 schrieb Lennart Borgman:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 3:16 PM, senny <yves.senn@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 17 Nov., 15:01, Lennart Borgman <lennart.borg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 1:43 PM, senny <yves.s...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hey there
>>>
>>> I am looking for a way to edit java-script and css snippets in a HTML
>>>
>>> document with their corresponding major modes. I've tried some of the
>>>
>>> multi major mode solutions but found most of them buggy and performing
>>>
>>> slowly. Recently I found the indirect-buffer feature of emacs. This is
>>>
>>> exactly what I am looking for but it somehow breaks fontification.
>>>
>>> When I clone a region into an indirect buffer the code does not get
>>>
>>> highlighted correctly.
>>>
>>> This seems only to happen when the original buffer is visible in an
>>>
>>> other window. when I only edit the indirect buffer, then fontification
>>>
>>> works as expected.
>>>
>>> Is there a workaround for this problem?
>>>
>>> Perhaps try latest version of nXhtml? Which version have you tried and
>>>
>>> what problems did you find. Did you report any bugs in nXhtml?
>>>
>>> I tried nXhtml when I used emacsW32, which was about two or three
>>>
>>> months ago (cant remember the exact version number of nXhtml). The
>>>
>>> mode felt kinda clumsy for me.
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks senny. Can you tell more exactly what you think is clumsy?
>>> (nXhtml contains a lot of multi major modes and other things related
>>> to web programming.)
>>>
>>>
>>> I did not report any errors because I
>>>
>>> didn't looked into the details, why things are not working.
>>>
>>>
>>> But can you please tell what it was that did not work for you?
>>>
>>>
>>> My
>>>
>>> impression of nXhtml was, that it was slowing my cursor movement down
>>>
>>> a lot
>>>
>>>
>>> I have made some optimisations since then (or rather removed some
>>> mistakes). If it feels slow you can also byte compile the whole
>>> nXhtml. (There is a menu entry in the nXhtml menu for that to make it
>>> easier.)
>>>
>>> But of course any multi major mode solution that is dynamic and checks
>>> for chunk boundaries while you are editing is doing a little bit more.
>>> However I do not think you will notice it very much normally. If you
>>> have an example where it feels slow I would be glad to know. (Please
>>> try the latest version then.)
>>>
>>>
>>> and that it had some unexpected behaviours from time to time.
>>>
>>>
>>> You mean bugs, or? Unfortunately I have no idea what you mean unless
>>> you tell me more.
>>>
>>>
>>> The other thing is, that I am looking for a flexible solution, I am
>>>
>>> editing a lot of different template languages (jsp, esp, rhtml) and
>>>
>>> it would be cool to use the same solution for all these cases.
>>>
>>>
>>> Hm. What do you mean? This exactly what nXhtml gives you, isn't it? Do
>>> you mean that you are not looking for a flexible solution?
>>>
>>> If you are missing some special template language then please tell me.
>>>
>>>
>>> Thats
>>>
>>> why i was heading for the "indirect-buffer" approach.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Senny
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>