GNU bug report logs -
#11094
Wrong cursor positioning with display+invisible
Previous Next
Reported by: Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 04:40:01 UTC
Severity: normal
Found in version 24.0.94
Done: Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.
Full log
Message #14 received at 11094 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
> From: Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
> Cc: 11094 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2012 21:06:59 -0400
>
> > For some value of "correctly". E.g., position the cursor over the
> > ".", which is the first file name in the archive, and type "C-x =".
> > You will see "63", which is a lie: the actual value of point is 111.
>
> I don't think it's a lie because that text is preceded by invisible
> text, so while "." is at 111, point is indeed at 63 (and that's just
> because of adjust_point_for_property, so we can get point to stay at
> 111 by being more careful with text property's stickiness).
Having point report X when it is position on a character whose
position is Y, or jump when you move it from one character of a file
name to the next violates the principle of least astonishment, IMO.
> I see that the problem is not so much that all the text is covered by
> those properties, but rather that there is are contiguous texts with
> `invisible' and `display' properties.
Yes, that doesn't help, as I mentioned.
> emacs -Q
> (put-text-property (point-min) (+ 4 (point-min)) 'display "<>")
> (goto-char (point-min))
>
> the cursor is drawn at the right place. I think this is the core of the
> problem that's handled differently from Emacs-23.
> [ IIUC you've gotten to the same conclusion. ]
While there could be more than one way to cut this cake, I still think
we should encourage Lips programmers to use the `cursor' property in
these situations.
> > If you still think we should support your original code, we should
> > schedule some post-24.1 redesign and refactoring. Let me know what
> > you think.
>
> I don't think it's a very high priority problem, but it would be good to
> try and tackle it, yes (post-24.1).
OK.
Should we close this bug, then?
This bug report was last modified 13 years and 103 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.