[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Todays exercise of sanity (or does "see" really match "not"?)
From: |
David Kastrup |
Subject: |
Re: Todays exercise of sanity (or does "see" really match "not"?) |
Date: |
Tue, 22 Mar 2005 15:46:51 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
Richard Stallman <address@hidden> writes:
> The simplest solution is to treat the `display' property like
> `invisible' property and to skip the text displayed over the
> original text.
>
> I think that is the right thing to do.
It would be wrong for preview-latex, probably one of the most
important applications extensively using the display property. It is
very important that the underlying buffer text remains both searchable
and replaceable, and preview-latex uses isearch-hooks and similar to
make this as natural and convenient as possible.
It has been doing this for years, probably like all applications using
the display property on non-trivial texts.
Doing an incompatible interface change breaking such packages at the
current point of time would be misguided. Even if it weren't, it is
wrong to do such a large change in the course of the 22.1 release.
You can't expect all package authors to have adapted to such an
incompatible change as fast as that.
Please don't. I can't see any advantage of breaking working packages
right now for no currently apparent significant practical advantage.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
- Todays exercise of sanity (or does "see" really match "not"?), Lennart Borgman, 2005/03/21
- Re: Todays exercise of sanity (or does "see" really match "not"?), Luc Teirlinck, 2005/03/21
- Re: Todays exercise of sanity (or does "see" really match "not"?), Lennart Borgman, 2005/03/21
- Re: Todays exercise of sanity (or does "see" really match "not"?), Juri Linkov, 2005/03/21
- Re: Todays exercise of sanity (or does "see" really match "not"?), David Kastrup, 2005/03/21
- Re: Todays exercise of sanity (or does "see" really match "not"?), Richard Stallman, 2005/03/22
- Re: Todays exercise of sanity (or does "see" really match "not"?),
David Kastrup <=
- Re: Todays exercise of sanity (or does "see" really match "not"?), Juri Linkov, 2005/03/22
- Re: Todays exercise of sanity (or does "see" really match "not"?), David Kastrup, 2005/03/22
- Re: Todays exercise of sanity (or does "see" really match "not"?), Richard Stallman, 2005/03/23
- Re: Todays exercise of sanity (or does "see" really match "not"?), Juri Linkov, 2005/03/23
- Re: Todays exercise of sanity (or does "see" really match "not"?), Luc Teirlinck, 2005/03/23
- Re: Todays exercise of sanity (or does "see" really match "not"?), Juri Linkov, 2005/03/23
- Re: Todays exercise of sanity (or does "see" really match "not"?), Luc Teirlinck, 2005/03/23
- Re: Todays exercise of sanity (or does "see" really match "not"?), Juri Linkov, 2005/03/23
- Re: Todays exercise of sanity (or does "see" really match "not"?), Stefan Monnier, 2005/03/23
- Re: Todays exercise of sanity (or does "see" really match "not"?), Luc Teirlinck, 2005/03/23