GNU bug report logs - #16413
24.3.50; Inconsistent behavior of text property functions in narrowed buffer

Previous Next

Package: emacs;

Reported by: Nathan Trapuzzano <nbtrap <at> nbtrap.com>

Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2014 03:07:01 UTC

Severity: wishlist

Found in version 24.3.50

Done: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Full log


Message #77 received at 16413 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Daniel Colascione <dancol <at> dancol.org>
To: Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>, 16413 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, nbtrap <at> nbtrap.com
Subject: Re: bug#16413: 24.3.50;
 Inconsistent behavior of text property functions in narrowed buffer
Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2014 20:35:01 -0800
On 01/11/2014 07:42 PM, Stefan Monnier wrote:
>> Narrowing *is* generally useful for treating part of a buffer
>> as a consistent unit, though, especially when that part is syntactically
>> different from the rest of the buffer.
>
> Actually, from where I stand, narrowing is harmful.  If I could get rid
> of it, I would.

Really? It's a very useful feature at a *user* level even if we ignore 
the lisp-level implications. Doesn't everyone whack C-x n d once in a 
while? Would you have implemented narrowing by putting invisible 
properties on the inaccessible region?

> The reason is precisely because it means different
> things to different people in different contexts, and these things
> require subtly different behaviors which are mutually incompatible.

As I see it, there are generally two use cases:

1) I'm a user and want to limit my view of the buffer, and
2) I'm a lisp program and want to put ad-hoc bounds on various operations.

I don't see why the two uses would be incompatible.




This bug report was last modified 3 years and 23 days ago.

Previous Next


GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.