From unknown Sat Sep 13 02:08:37 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#18367: 24.4.50; [PATCH] Text property `font-lock-ignore', to protect from font-lock Resent-From: Drew Adams Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2014 20:14:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: report 18367 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch To: 18367@debbugs.gnu.org X-Debbugs-Original-To: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Received: via spool by submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B.140942960315516 (code B ref -1); Sat, 30 Aug 2014 20:14:01 +0000 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 30 Aug 2014 20:13:23 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54643 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XNp1W-00042B-Tp for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 30 Aug 2014 16:13:23 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:43806) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XNp1U-00041x-Bs for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 30 Aug 2014 16:13:21 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XNp1I-0007bs-EX for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 30 Aug 2014 16:13:14 -0400 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50 autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::11]:39207) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XNp1I-0007bl-Bl for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 30 Aug 2014 16:13:08 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45508) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XNp1C-0008Id-6D for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 30 Aug 2014 16:13:08 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XNp12-0007Yt-SH for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 30 Aug 2014 16:13:02 -0400 Received: from userp1040.oracle.com ([156.151.31.81]:18844) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XNp12-0007YL-Hn for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 30 Aug 2014 16:12:52 -0400 Received: from acsinet22.oracle.com (acsinet22.oracle.com [141.146.126.238]) by userp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id s7UKCiOX018252 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Sat, 30 Aug 2014 20:12:45 GMT Received: from userz7021.oracle.com (userz7021.oracle.com [156.151.31.85]) by acsinet22.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s7UKChZv008883 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Sat, 30 Aug 2014 20:12:44 GMT Received: from abhmp0018.oracle.com (abhmp0018.oracle.com [141.146.116.24]) by userz7021.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s7UKCg9X001868 for ; Sat, 30 Aug 2014 20:12:43 GMT MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <86f1a219-9ab5-439f-85ca-936b942cb034@default> Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2014 13:12:44 -0700 (PDT) From: Drew Adams X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.8.2 (807160) [OL 12.0.6691.5000 (x86)] Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="__1409429562652271229abhmp0018.oracle.com" X-Source-IP: acsinet22.oracle.com [141.146.126.238] X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.4.x-2.6.x [generic] X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::11 X-Spam-Score: -4.0 (----) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -4.0 (----) --__1409429562652271229abhmp0018.oracle.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Bug or missing feature: Prevent font-lock from changing text properties on text that has property `font-lock-ignore'. See http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2014-08/msg00540.html Patch attached. ChangeLog entry: 2014-08-30 Drew Adams =09* font-lock.el: Respect text property `font-lock-ignore'. (put-text-property-unless-ignore): New function. =09(font-lock-default-unfontify-region): Do not unfontify if =09text has property `font-lock-ignore'. =09(font-lock-prepend-text-property, font-lock-append-text-property) =09(font-lock-fillin-text-property, font-lock-apply-syntactic-highlight) =09(font-lock-fontify-syntactically-region, font-lock-apply-highlight) =09(font-lock-fontify-anchored-keywords) =09(font-lock-fontify-keywords-region): Use put-text-property-unless-ignore, not put-text-property. In GNU Emacs 24.4.50.1 (i686-pc-mingw32) of 2014-08-15 on LEG570 Bzr revision: 117706 rgm@gnu.org-20140815043406-p5hbu97cbm7pulcn Windowing system distributor `Microsoft Corp.', version 6.1.7601 Configured using: `configure --enable-checking 'CFLAGS=3D-O0 -g3' CPPFLAGS=3D-DGLYPH_DEBUG= =3D1' --__1409429562652271229abhmp0018.oracle.com Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="font-lock-2014-08-30.patch" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="font-lock-2014-08-30.patch" ZGlmZiAtYyBmb250LWxvY2suZWwgZm9udC1sb2NrLXBhdGNoZWQtMjAxNC0wOC0zMC5lbAoqKiog Zm9udC1sb2NrLmVsCVNhdCBBdWcgMzAgMTA6MTk6MjYgMjAxNAotLS0gZm9udC1sb2NrLXBhdGNo ZWQtMjAxNC0wOC0zMC5lbAlTYXQgQXVnIDMwIDExOjQ1OjUyIDIwMTQKKioqKioqKioqKioqKioq CioqKiAxMjM2LDEyNDkgKioqKgogIHdoYXQgcHJvcGVydGllcyB0byBjbGVhciBiZWZvcmUgcmVm b250aWZ5aW5nIGEgcmVnaW9uLiIpCiAgCiAgKGRlZnVuIGZvbnQtbG9jay1kZWZhdWx0LXVuZm9u dGlmeS1yZWdpb24gKGJlZyBlbmQpCiEgICAiVW5mb250aWZ5IHRoZSB0ZXh0IGJldHdlZW4gQkVH IGFuZCBFTkQuCiEgVGhpcyBmdW5jdGlvbiBpcyB0aGUgZGVmYXVsdCBgZm9udC1sb2NrLXVuZm9u dGlmeS1yZWdpb24tZnVuY3Rpb24nLiIKISAgIChyZW1vdmUtbGlzdC1vZi10ZXh0LXByb3BlcnRp ZXMKISAgICBiZWcgZW5kIChhcHBlbmQKISAJICAgIGZvbnQtbG9jay1leHRyYS1tYW5hZ2VkLXBy b3BzCiEgCSAgICAoaWYgZm9udC1sb2NrLXN5bnRhY3RpYy1rZXl3b3JkcwohIAkJJyhzeW50YXgt dGFibGUgZmFjZSBmb250LWxvY2stbXVsdGlsaW5lKQohIAkgICAgICAnKGZhY2UgZm9udC1sb2Nr LW11bHRpbGluZSkpKSkpCiAgCiAgOzsgQ2FsbGVkIHdoZW4gYW55IG1vZGlmaWNhdGlvbiBpcyBt YWRlIHRvIGJ1ZmZlciB0ZXh0LgogIChkZWZ1biBmb250LWxvY2stYWZ0ZXItY2hhbmdlLWZ1bmN0 aW9uIChiZWcgZW5kICZvcHRpb25hbCBvbGQtbGVuKQotLS0gMTIzNiwxMjU0IC0tLS0KICB3aGF0 IHByb3BlcnRpZXMgdG8gY2xlYXIgYmVmb3JlIHJlZm9udGlmeWluZyBhIHJlZ2lvbi4iKQogIAog IChkZWZ1biBmb250LWxvY2stZGVmYXVsdC11bmZvbnRpZnktcmVnaW9uIChiZWcgZW5kKQohICAg IlVuZm9udGlmeSBmcm9tIEJFRyB0byBFTkQsIGV4Y2VwdCB0ZXh0IHdpdGggcHJvcGVydHkgYGZv bnQtbG9jay1pZ25vcmUnLiIKISAgIChsZXQgKChoZXJlICAobWluIGJlZyBlbmQpKQohICAgICAg ICAgKGVuZDEgIChtYXggYmVnIGVuZCkpCiEgICAgICAgICBjaGcpCiEgICAgICh3aGlsZSAoPCBo ZXJlIGVuZDEpCiEgICAgICAgKHNldHEgY2hnICAobmV4dC1zaW5nbGUtcHJvcGVydHktY2hhbmdl IGhlcmUgJ2ZvbnQtbG9jay1pZ25vcmUgbmlsIGVuZDEpKQohICAgICAgICh1bmxlc3MgKGdldC10 ZXh0LXByb3BlcnR5IGhlcmUgJ2ZvbnQtbG9jay1pZ25vcmUpCiEgICAgICAgICAocmVtb3ZlLWxp c3Qtb2YtdGV4dC1wcm9wZXJ0aWVzCiEgICAgICAgICAgaGVyZSBjaGcgKGFwcGVuZCBmb250LWxv Y2stZXh0cmEtbWFuYWdlZC1wcm9wcwohICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgKGlmIGZv bnQtbG9jay1zeW50YWN0aWMta2V5d29yZHMKISAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAnKHN5bnRheC10YWJsZSBmYWNlIGZvbnQtbG9jay1tdWx0aWxpbmUpCiEgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICcoZmFjZSBmb250LWxvY2stbXVsdGlsaW5lKSkpKSkKISAgICAgICAo c2V0cSBoZXJlICBjaGcpKSkpCiAgCiAgOzsgQ2FsbGVkIHdoZW4gYW55IG1vZGlmaWNhdGlvbiBp cyBtYWRlIHRvIGJ1ZmZlciB0ZXh0LgogIChkZWZ1biBmb250LWxvY2stYWZ0ZXItY2hhbmdlLWZ1 bmN0aW9uIChiZWcgZW5kICZvcHRpb25hbCBvbGQtbGVuKQoqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioKKioqIDEz ODAsMTM4OCAqKioqCiAgCSAgIChvciAoa2V5d29yZHAgKGNhciBwcmV2KSkKICAJICAgICAgICht ZW1xIChjYXIgcHJldikgJyhmb3JlZ3JvdW5kLWNvbG9yIGJhY2tncm91bmQtY29sb3IpKSkKICAJ ICAgKHNldHEgcHJldiAobGlzdCBwcmV2KSkpCiEgICAgICAgKHB1dC10ZXh0LXByb3BlcnR5IHN0 YXJ0IG5leHQgcHJvcAohIAkJCSAoYXBwZW5kIHZhbCAoaWYgKGxpc3RwIHByZXYpIHByZXYgKGxp c3QgcHJldikpKQohIAkJCSBvYmplY3QpCiAgICAgICAgKHNldHEgc3RhcnQgbmV4dCkpKSkKICAK ICAoZGVmdW4gZm9udC1sb2NrLWFwcGVuZC10ZXh0LXByb3BlcnR5IChzdGFydCBlbmQgcHJvcCB2 YWx1ZSAmb3B0aW9uYWwgb2JqZWN0KQotLS0gMTM4NSwxMzkzIC0tLS0KICAJICAgKG9yIChrZXl3 b3JkcCAoY2FyIHByZXYpKQogIAkgICAgICAgKG1lbXEgKGNhciBwcmV2KSAnKGZvcmVncm91bmQt Y29sb3IgYmFja2dyb3VuZC1jb2xvcikpKQogIAkgICAoc2V0cSBwcmV2IChsaXN0IHByZXYpKSkK ISAgICAgICAocHV0LXRleHQtcHJvcGVydHktdW5sZXNzLWlnbm9yZSBzdGFydCBuZXh0IHByb3AK ISAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAoYXBwZW5kIHZhbCAoaWYg KGxpc3RwIHByZXYpIHByZXYgKGxpc3QgcHJldikpKQohICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIG9iamVjdCkKICAgICAgICAoc2V0cSBzdGFydCBuZXh0KSkpKQogIAog IChkZWZ1biBmb250LWxvY2stYXBwZW5kLXRleHQtcHJvcGVydHkgKHN0YXJ0IGVuZCBwcm9wIHZh bHVlICZvcHRpb25hbCBvYmplY3QpCioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKgoqKiogMTQwMCwxNDA4ICoqKioK ICAJICAgKG9yIChrZXl3b3JkcCAoY2FyIHByZXYpKQogIAkgICAgICAgKG1lbXEgKGNhciBwcmV2 KSAnKGZvcmVncm91bmQtY29sb3IgYmFja2dyb3VuZC1jb2xvcikpKQogIAkgICAoc2V0cSBwcmV2 IChsaXN0IHByZXYpKSkKISAgICAgICAocHV0LXRleHQtcHJvcGVydHkgc3RhcnQgbmV4dCBwcm9w CiEgCQkJIChhcHBlbmQgKGlmIChsaXN0cCBwcmV2KSBwcmV2IChsaXN0IHByZXYpKSB2YWwpCiEg CQkJIG9iamVjdCkKICAgICAgICAoc2V0cSBzdGFydCBuZXh0KSkpKQogIAogIChkZWZ1biBmb250 LWxvY2stZmlsbGluLXRleHQtcHJvcGVydHkgKHN0YXJ0IGVuZCBwcm9wIHZhbHVlICZvcHRpb25h bCBvYmplY3QpCi0tLSAxNDA1LDE0MTMgLS0tLQogIAkgICAob3IgKGtleXdvcmRwIChjYXIgcHJl dikpCiAgCSAgICAgICAobWVtcSAoY2FyIHByZXYpICcoZm9yZWdyb3VuZC1jb2xvciBiYWNrZ3Jv dW5kLWNvbG9yKSkpCiAgCSAgIChzZXRxIHByZXYgKGxpc3QgcHJldikpKQohICAgICAgIChwdXQt dGV4dC1wcm9wZXJ0eS11bmxlc3MtaWdub3JlIHN0YXJ0IG5leHQgcHJvcAohICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIChhcHBlbmQgKGlmIChsaXN0cCBwcmV2KSBwcmV2 IChsaXN0IHByZXYpKSB2YWwpCiEgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgb2JqZWN0KQogICAgICAgIChzZXRxIHN0YXJ0IG5leHQpKSkpCiAgCiAgKGRlZnVuIGZvbnQt bG9jay1maWxsaW4tdGV4dC1wcm9wZXJ0eSAoc3RhcnQgZW5kIHByb3AgdmFsdWUgJm9wdGlvbmFs IG9iamVjdCkKKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqCioqKiAxNDEzLDE0MTkgKioqKgogICAgKGxldCAoKHN0 YXJ0ICh0ZXh0LXByb3BlcnR5LWFueSBzdGFydCBlbmQgcHJvcCBuaWwgb2JqZWN0KSkgbmV4dCkK ICAgICAgKHdoaWxlIHN0YXJ0CiAgICAgICAgKHNldHEgbmV4dCAobmV4dC1zaW5nbGUtcHJvcGVy dHktY2hhbmdlIHN0YXJ0IHByb3Agb2JqZWN0IGVuZCkpCiEgICAgICAgKHB1dC10ZXh0LXByb3Bl cnR5IHN0YXJ0IG5leHQgcHJvcCB2YWx1ZSBvYmplY3QpCiAgICAgICAgKHNldHEgc3RhcnQgKHRl eHQtcHJvcGVydHktYW55IG5leHQgZW5kIHByb3AgbmlsIG9iamVjdCkpKSkpCiAgCiAgOzsgRm9y IGNvbXBsZXRlbmVzczogdGhpcyBpcyB0byBgcmVtb3ZlLXRleHQtcHJvcGVydGllcycgYXMgYHB1 dC10ZXh0LXByb3BlcnR5JwotLS0gMTQxOCwxNDI0IC0tLS0KICAgIChsZXQgKChzdGFydCAodGV4 dC1wcm9wZXJ0eS1hbnkgc3RhcnQgZW5kIHByb3AgbmlsIG9iamVjdCkpIG5leHQpCiAgICAgICh3 aGlsZSBzdGFydAogICAgICAgIChzZXRxIG5leHQgKG5leHQtc2luZ2xlLXByb3BlcnR5LWNoYW5n ZSBzdGFydCBwcm9wIG9iamVjdCBlbmQpKQohICAgICAgIChwdXQtdGV4dC1wcm9wZXJ0eS11bmxl c3MtaWdub3JlIHN0YXJ0IG5leHQgcHJvcCB2YWx1ZSBvYmplY3QpCiAgICAgICAgKHNldHEgc3Rh cnQgKHRleHQtcHJvcGVydHktYW55IG5leHQgZW5kIHByb3AgbmlsIG9iamVjdCkpKSkpCiAgCiAg OzsgRm9yIGNvbXBsZXRlbmVzczogdGhpcyBpcyB0byBgcmVtb3ZlLXRleHQtcHJvcGVydGllcycg YXMgYHB1dC10ZXh0LXByb3BlcnR5JwoqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioKKioqIDE0ODAsMTQ5NSAqKioq CiAgICAgICAgOzsgc3RpbGwgYmUgbmVjZXNzYXJ5IGZvciBvdGhlciB1c2VycyBvZiBzeW50YXgt cHBzcyBhbnl3YXkuCiAgICAgICAgKHN5bnRheC1wcHNzLWFmdGVyLWNoYW5nZS1mdW5jdGlvbiBz dGFydCkKICAgICAgICAoY29uZAohICAgICAgICAoKG5vdCBvdmVycmlkZSkKISAJOzsgQ2Fubm90 IG92ZXJyaWRlIGV4aXN0aW5nIGZvbnRpZmljYXRpb24uCiEgCShvciAodGV4dC1wcm9wZXJ0eS1u b3QtYWxsIHN0YXJ0IGVuZCAnc3ludGF4LXRhYmxlIG5pbCkKISAJICAgIChwdXQtdGV4dC1wcm9w ZXJ0eSBzdGFydCBlbmQgJ3N5bnRheC10YWJsZSB2YWx1ZSkpKQohICAgICAgICAoKGVxIG92ZXJy aWRlIHQpCiEgCTs7IE92ZXJyaWRlIGV4aXN0aW5nIGZvbnRpZmljYXRpb24uCiEgCShwdXQtdGV4 dC1wcm9wZXJ0eSBzdGFydCBlbmQgJ3N5bnRheC10YWJsZSB2YWx1ZSkpCiEgICAgICAgICgoZXEg b3ZlcnJpZGUgJ2tlZXApCiEgCTs7IEtlZXAgZXhpc3RpbmcgZm9udGlmaWNhdGlvbi4KISAJKGZv bnQtbG9jay1maWxsaW4tdGV4dC1wcm9wZXJ0eSBzdGFydCBlbmQgJ3N5bnRheC10YWJsZSB2YWx1 ZSkpKSkpKQogIAogIChkZWZ1biBmb250LWxvY2stZm9udGlmeS1zeW50YWN0aWMtYW5jaG9yZWQt a2V5d29yZHMgKGtleXdvcmRzIGxpbWl0KQogICAgIkZvbnRpZnkgYWNjb3JkaW5nIHRvIEtFWVdP UkRTIHVudGlsIExJTUlULgotLS0gMTQ4NSwxNTAwIC0tLS0KICAgICAgICA7OyBzdGlsbCBiZSBu ZWNlc3NhcnkgZm9yIG90aGVyIHVzZXJzIG9mIHN5bnRheC1wcHNzIGFueXdheS4KICAgICAgICAo c3ludGF4LXBwc3MtYWZ0ZXItY2hhbmdlLWZ1bmN0aW9uIHN0YXJ0KQogICAgICAgIChjb25kCiEg ICAgICAgICAoKG5vdCBvdmVycmlkZSkKISAgICAgICAgICA7OyBDYW5ub3Qgb3ZlcnJpZGUgZXhp c3RpbmcgZm9udGlmaWNhdGlvbi4KISAgICAgICAgICAob3IgKHRleHQtcHJvcGVydHktbm90LWFs bCBzdGFydCBlbmQgJ3N5bnRheC10YWJsZSBuaWwpCiEgICAgICAgICAgICAgIChwdXQtdGV4dC1w cm9wZXJ0eS11bmxlc3MtaWdub3JlIHN0YXJ0IGVuZCAnc3ludGF4LXRhYmxlIHZhbHVlKSkpCiEg ICAgICAgICAoKGVxIG92ZXJyaWRlIHQpCiEgICAgICAgICAgOzsgT3ZlcnJpZGUgZXhpc3Rpbmcg Zm9udGlmaWNhdGlvbi4KISAgICAgICAgICAocHV0LXRleHQtcHJvcGVydHktdW5sZXNzLWlnbm9y ZSBzdGFydCBlbmQgJ3N5bnRheC10YWJsZSB2YWx1ZSkpCiEgICAgICAgICAoKGVxIG92ZXJyaWRl ICdrZWVwKQohICAgICAgICAgIDs7IEtlZXAgZXhpc3RpbmcgZm9udGlmaWNhdGlvbi4KISAgICAg ICAgICAoZm9udC1sb2NrLWZpbGxpbi10ZXh0LXByb3BlcnR5IHN0YXJ0IGVuZCAnc3ludGF4LXRh YmxlIHZhbHVlKSkpKSkpCiAgCiAgKGRlZnVuIGZvbnQtbG9jay1mb250aWZ5LXN5bnRhY3RpYy1h bmNob3JlZC1rZXl3b3JkcyAoa2V5d29yZHMgbGltaXQpCiAgICAiRm9udGlmeSBhY2NvcmRpbmcg dG8gS0VZV09SRFMgdW50aWwgTElNSVQuCioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKgoqKiogMTU4NSwxNTkxICoq KioKICAJICAgIChzZXRxIGJlZyAobWF4IChudGggOCBzdGF0ZSkgc3RhcnQpKQogIAkgICAgKHNl dHEgc3RhdGUgKHBhcnNlLXBhcnRpYWwtc2V4cCAocG9pbnQpIGVuZCBuaWwgbmlsIHN0YXRlCiAg CQkJCQkgICAgJ3N5bnRheC10YWJsZSkpCiEgCSAgICAod2hlbiBmYWNlIChwdXQtdGV4dC1wcm9w ZXJ0eSBiZWcgKHBvaW50KSAnZmFjZSBmYWNlKSkKICAJICAgICh3aGVuIChhbmQgKGVxIGZhY2Ug J2ZvbnQtbG9jay1jb21tZW50LWZhY2UpCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAob3IgZm9u dC1sb2NrLWNvbW1lbnQtc3RhcnQtc2tpcAogIAkJCSAgIGNvbW1lbnQtc3RhcnQtc2tpcCkpCi0t LSAxNTkwLDE1OTYgLS0tLQogIAkgICAgKHNldHEgYmVnIChtYXggKG50aCA4IHN0YXRlKSBzdGFy dCkpCiAgCSAgICAoc2V0cSBzdGF0ZSAocGFyc2UtcGFydGlhbC1zZXhwIChwb2ludCkgZW5kIG5p bCBuaWwgc3RhdGUKICAJCQkJCSAgICAnc3ludGF4LXRhYmxlKSkKISAJICAgICh3aGVuIGZhY2Ug KHB1dC10ZXh0LXByb3BlcnR5LXVubGVzcy1pZ25vcmUgYmVnIChwb2ludCkgJ2ZhY2UgZmFjZSkp CiAgCSAgICAod2hlbiAoYW5kIChlcSBmYWNlICdmb250LWxvY2stY29tbWVudC1mYWNlKQogICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgKG9yIGZvbnQtbG9jay1jb21tZW50LXN0YXJ0LXNraXAKICAJ CQkgICBjb21tZW50LXN0YXJ0LXNraXApKQoqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioKKioqIDE1OTUsMTYwNCAq KioqCiAgCQkoZ290by1jaGFyIGJlZykKICAJCShpZiAobG9va2luZy1hdCAob3IgZm9udC1sb2Nr LWNvbW1lbnQtc3RhcnQtc2tpcAogIAkJCQkgICAgY29tbWVudC1zdGFydC1za2lwKSkKISAJCSAg ICAocHV0LXRleHQtcHJvcGVydHkgYmVnIChtYXRjaC1lbmQgMCkgJ2ZhY2UKICAJCQkJICAgICAg IGZvbnQtbG9jay1jb21tZW50LWRlbGltaXRlci1mYWNlKSkpCiAgCSAgICAgIChpZiAobG9va2lu Zy1iYWNrIGNvbW1lbnQtZW5kLXJlZ2V4cCAocG9pbnQtYXQtYm9sKSB0KQohIAkJICAocHV0LXRl eHQtcHJvcGVydHkgKG1hdGNoLWJlZ2lubmluZyAwKSAocG9pbnQpICdmYWNlCiAgCQkJCSAgICAg Zm9udC1sb2NrLWNvbW1lbnQtZGVsaW1pdGVyLWZhY2UpKSkpCiAgCSAgKDwgKHBvaW50KSBlbmQp KQogICAgICAgIChzZXRxIHN0YXRlIChwYXJzZS1wYXJ0aWFsLXNleHAgKHBvaW50KSBlbmQgbmls IG5pbCBzdGF0ZQotLS0gMTYwMCwxNjA5IC0tLS0KICAJCShnb3RvLWNoYXIgYmVnKQogIAkJKGlm IChsb29raW5nLWF0IChvciBmb250LWxvY2stY29tbWVudC1zdGFydC1za2lwCiAgCQkJCSAgICBj b21tZW50LXN0YXJ0LXNraXApKQohIAkJICAgIChwdXQtdGV4dC1wcm9wZXJ0eS11bmxlc3MtaWdu b3JlIGJlZyAobWF0Y2gtZW5kIDApICdmYWNlCiAgCQkJCSAgICAgICBmb250LWxvY2stY29tbWVu dC1kZWxpbWl0ZXItZmFjZSkpKQogIAkgICAgICAoaWYgKGxvb2tpbmctYmFjayBjb21tZW50LWVu ZC1yZWdleHAgKHBvaW50LWF0LWJvbCkgdCkKISAJCSAgKHB1dC10ZXh0LXByb3BlcnR5LXVubGVz cy1pZ25vcmUgKG1hdGNoLWJlZ2lubmluZyAwKSAocG9pbnQpICdmYWNlCiAgCQkJCSAgICAgZm9u dC1sb2NrLWNvbW1lbnQtZGVsaW1pdGVyLWZhY2UpKSkpCiAgCSAgKDwgKHBvaW50KSBlbmQpKQog ICAgICAgIChzZXRxIHN0YXRlIChwYXJzZS1wYXJ0aWFsLXNleHAgKHBvaW50KSBlbmQgbmlsIG5p bCBzdGF0ZQoqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioKKioqIDE2MzIsMTY0MSAqKioqCiAgCSAoKG5vdCBvdmVy cmlkZSkKICAJICA7OyBDYW5ub3Qgb3ZlcnJpZGUgZXhpc3RpbmcgZm9udGlmaWNhdGlvbi4KICAJ ICAob3IgKHRleHQtcHJvcGVydHktbm90LWFsbCBzdGFydCBlbmQgJ2ZhY2UgbmlsKQohIAkgICAg ICAocHV0LXRleHQtcHJvcGVydHkgc3RhcnQgZW5kICdmYWNlIHZhbCkpKQogIAkgKChlcSBvdmVy cmlkZSB0KQogIAkgIDs7IE92ZXJyaWRlIGV4aXN0aW5nIGZvbnRpZmljYXRpb24uCiEgCSAgKHB1 dC10ZXh0LXByb3BlcnR5IHN0YXJ0IGVuZCAnZmFjZSB2YWwpKQogIAkgKChlcSBvdmVycmlkZSAn cHJlcGVuZCkKICAJICA7OyBQcmVwZW5kIHRvIGV4aXN0aW5nIGZvbnRpZmljYXRpb24uCiAgCSAg KGZvbnQtbG9jay1wcmVwZW5kLXRleHQtcHJvcGVydHkgc3RhcnQgZW5kICdmYWNlIHZhbCkpCi0t LSAxNjM3LDE2NDYgLS0tLQogIAkgKChub3Qgb3ZlcnJpZGUpCiAgCSAgOzsgQ2Fubm90IG92ZXJy aWRlIGV4aXN0aW5nIGZvbnRpZmljYXRpb24uCiAgCSAgKG9yICh0ZXh0LXByb3BlcnR5LW5vdC1h bGwgc3RhcnQgZW5kICdmYWNlIG5pbCkKISAJICAgICAgKHB1dC10ZXh0LXByb3BlcnR5LXVubGVz cy1pZ25vcmUgc3RhcnQgZW5kICdmYWNlIHZhbCkpKQogIAkgKChlcSBvdmVycmlkZSB0KQogIAkg IDs7IE92ZXJyaWRlIGV4aXN0aW5nIGZvbnRpZmljYXRpb24uCiEgCSAgKHB1dC10ZXh0LXByb3Bl cnR5LXVubGVzcy1pZ25vcmUgc3RhcnQgZW5kICdmYWNlIHZhbCkpCiAgCSAoKGVxIG92ZXJyaWRl ICdwcmVwZW5kKQogIAkgIDs7IFByZXBlbmQgdG8gZXhpc3RpbmcgZm9udGlmaWNhdGlvbi4KICAJ ICAoZm9udC1sb2NrLXByZXBlbmQtdGV4dC1wcm9wZXJ0eSBzdGFydCBlbmQgJ2ZhY2UgdmFsKSkK KioqKioqKioqKioqKioqCioqKiAxNjYxLDE2NzEgKioqKgogICAgICAgICh3aGVuIChhbmQgZm9u dC1sb2NrLW11bHRpbGluZSAoPj0gbGltaXQgKGxpbmUtYmVnaW5uaW5nLXBvc2l0aW9uIDIpKSkK ICAJOzsgdGhpcyBpcyBhIG11bHRpbGluZSBhbmNob3JlZCBtYXRjaAogIAk7OyAoc2V0cSBmb250 LWxvY2stbXVsdGlsaW5lIHQpCiEgCShwdXQtdGV4dC1wcm9wZXJ0eSAoaWYgKD0gbGltaXQgKGxp bmUtYmVnaW5uaW5nLXBvc2l0aW9uIDIpKQohIAkJCSAgICAgICAoMS0gbGltaXQpCiEgCQkJICAg ICAobWluIGxlYWQtc3RhcnQgKHBvaW50KSkpCiEgCQkJICAgbGltaXQKISAJCQkgICAnZm9udC1s b2NrLW11bHRpbGluZSB0KSkpCiAgICAgIChzYXZlLW1hdGNoLWRhdGEKICAgICAgICA7OyBGaW5k IGFuIG9jY3VycmVuY2Ugb2YgYG1hdGNoZXInIGJlZm9yZSBgbGltaXQnLgogICAgICAgICh3aGls ZSAoYW5kICg8IChwb2ludCkgbGltaXQpCi0tLSAxNjY2LDE2NzYgLS0tLQogICAgICAgICh3aGVu IChhbmQgZm9udC1sb2NrLW11bHRpbGluZSAoPj0gbGltaXQgKGxpbmUtYmVnaW5uaW5nLXBvc2l0 aW9uIDIpKSkKICAJOzsgdGhpcyBpcyBhIG11bHRpbGluZSBhbmNob3JlZCBtYXRjaAogIAk7OyAo c2V0cSBmb250LWxvY2stbXVsdGlsaW5lIHQpCiEgCShwdXQtdGV4dC1wcm9wZXJ0eS11bmxlc3Mt aWdub3JlIChpZiAoPSBsaW1pdCAobGluZS1iZWdpbm5pbmctcG9zaXRpb24gMikpCiEgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgKDEtIGxpbWl0KQohICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAobWluIGxlYWQtc3RhcnQgKHBv aW50KSkpCiEgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICBsaW1pdAoh ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgJ2ZvbnQtbG9jay1tdWx0 aWxpbmUgdCkpKQogICAgICAoc2F2ZS1tYXRjaC1kYXRhCiAgICAgICAgOzsgRmluZCBhbiBvY2N1 cnJlbmNlIG9mIGBtYXRjaGVyJyBiZWZvcmUgYGxpbWl0Jy4KICAgICAgICAod2hpbGUgKGFuZCAo PCAocG9pbnQpIGxpbWl0KQoqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioKKioqIDE3MDcsMTczNSAqKioqCiAgCQkg ICAgKGZ1bmNhbGwgbWF0Y2hlciBlbmQpKQogICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIDs7IEJld2FyZSBl bXB0eSBzdHJpbmcgbWF0Y2hlcyBzaW5jZSB0aGV5IHdpbGwKICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICA7 OyBsb29wIGluZGVmaW5pdGVseS4KISAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAob3IgKD4gKHBvaW50KSAo bWF0Y2gtYmVnaW5uaW5nIDApKQohICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAocHJvZ24gKGZvcndh cmQtY2hhciAxKSB0KSkpCiEgCSh3aGVuIChhbmQgZm9udC1sb2NrLW11bHRpbGluZQohIAkJICAg KD49IChwb2ludCkKISAJCSAgICAgICAoc2F2ZS1leGN1cnNpb24gKGdvdG8tY2hhciAobWF0Y2gt YmVnaW5uaW5nIDApKQohIAkJCQkgICAgICAgKGZvcndhcmQtbGluZSAxKSAocG9pbnQpKSkpCiEg CSAgOzsgdGhpcyBpcyBhIG11bHRpbGluZSByZWdleHAgbWF0Y2gKISAJICA7OyAoc2V0cSBmb250 LWxvY2stbXVsdGlsaW5lIHQpCiEgCSAgKHB1dC10ZXh0LXByb3BlcnR5IChpZiAoPSAocG9pbnQp CiEgCQkJCSAgICAoc2F2ZS1leGN1cnNpb24KISAJCQkJICAgICAgKGdvdG8tY2hhciAobWF0Y2gt YmVnaW5uaW5nIDApKQohIAkJCQkgICAgICAoZm9yd2FyZC1saW5lIDEpIChwb2ludCkpKQohIAkJ CQkgKDEtIChwb2ludCkpCiEgCQkJICAgICAgIChtYXRjaC1iZWdpbm5pbmcgMCkpCiEgCQkJICAg ICAocG9pbnQpCiEgCQkJICAgICAnZm9udC1sb2NrLW11bHRpbGluZSB0KSkKISAJOzsgQXBwbHkg ZWFjaCBoaWdobGlnaHQgdG8gdGhpcyBpbnN0YW5jZSBvZiBgbWF0Y2hlcicsIHdoaWNoIG1heSBi ZQohIAk7OyBzcGVjaWZpYyBoaWdobGlnaHRzIG9yIG1vcmUga2V5d29yZHMgYW5jaG9yZWQgdG8g YG1hdGNoZXInLgohIAkoc2V0cSBoaWdobGlnaHRzIChjZHIga2V5d29yZCkpCiEgCSh3aGlsZSBo aWdobGlnaHRzCiEgCSAgKGlmIChudW1iZXJwIChjYXIgKGNhciBoaWdobGlnaHRzKSkpCiEgCSAg ICAgIChmb250LWxvY2stYXBwbHktaGlnaGxpZ2h0IChjYXIgaGlnaGxpZ2h0cykpCiEgCSAgICAo c2V0LW1hcmtlciBwb3MgKHBvaW50KSkKICAgICAgICAgICAgICAoZm9udC1sb2NrLWZvbnRpZnkt YW5jaG9yZWQta2V5d29yZHMgKGNhciBoaWdobGlnaHRzKSBlbmQpCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgOzsg RW5zdXJlIGZvcndhcmQgcHJvZ3Jlc3MuICBgcG9zJyBpcyBhIG1hcmtlciBiZWNhdXNlIGFuY2hv cmVkCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgOzsga2V5d29yZCBtYXkgYWRkL2RlbGV0ZSB0ZXh0ICh0aGlzIGhh cHBlbnMgZS5nLiBpbiBncmVwLmVsKS4KLS0tIDE3MTIsMTczOCAtLS0tCiAgCQkgICAgKGZ1bmNh bGwgbWF0Y2hlciBlbmQpKQogICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIDs7IEJld2FyZSBlbXB0eSBzdHJp bmcgbWF0Y2hlcyBzaW5jZSB0aGV5IHdpbGwKICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICA7OyBsb29wIGlu ZGVmaW5pdGVseS4KISAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAob3IgKD4gKHBvaW50KSAobWF0Y2gtYmVn aW5uaW5nIDApKSAgKHByb2duIChmb3J3YXJkLWNoYXIgMSkgdCkpKQohICAgICAgICAgKHdoZW4g KGFuZCBmb250LWxvY2stbXVsdGlsaW5lCiEgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICg+PSAocG9pbnQp IChzYXZlLWV4Y3Vyc2lvbiAoZ290by1jaGFyIChtYXRjaC1iZWdpbm5pbmcgMCkpCiEgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAoZm9yd2FyZC1saW5lIDEp IChwb2ludCkpKSkKISAgICAgICAgICAgOzsgdGhpcyBpcyBhIG11bHRpbGluZSByZWdleHAgbWF0 Y2gKISAgICAgICAgICAgOzsgKHNldHEgZm9udC1sb2NrLW11bHRpbGluZSAgdCkKISAgICAgICAg ICAgKHB1dC10ZXh0LXByb3BlcnR5LXVubGVzcy1pZ25vcmUgKGlmICg9IChwb2ludCkKISAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIChzYXZlLWV4Y3Vy c2lvbgohICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAoZ290by1jaGFyIChtYXRjaC1iZWdpbm5pbmcgMCkpCiEgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIChmb3J3YXJkLWxpbmUgMSkgKHBvaW50KSkp CiEgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAoMS0gKHBv aW50KSkKISAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAobWF0 Y2gtYmVnaW5uaW5nIDApKQohICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAocG9pbnQpCiEgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICdmb250LWxvY2stbXVsdGlsaW5lIHQpKQohICAgICAgICAgOzsgQXBwbHkgZWFjaCBoaWdobGln aHQgdG8gdGhpcyBpbnN0YW5jZSBvZiBgbWF0Y2hlcicsIHdoaWNoIG1heSBiZQohICAgICAgICAg Ozsgc3BlY2lmaWMgaGlnaGxpZ2h0cyBvciBtb3JlIGtleXdvcmRzIGFuY2hvcmVkIHRvIGBtYXRj aGVyJy4KISAgICAgICAgIChzZXRxIGhpZ2hsaWdodHMgIChjZHIga2V5d29yZCkpCiEgICAgICAg ICAod2hpbGUgaGlnaGxpZ2h0cwohICAgICAgICAgICAoaWYgKG51bWJlcnAgKGNhciAoY2FyIGhp Z2hsaWdodHMpKSkKISAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIChmb250LWxvY2stYXBwbHktaGlnaGxpZ2h0IChj YXIgaGlnaGxpZ2h0cykpCiEgICAgICAgICAgICAgKHNldC1tYXJrZXIgcG9zIChwb2ludCkpCiAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgKGZvbnQtbG9jay1mb250aWZ5LWFuY2hvcmVkLWtleXdvcmRzIChjYXIgaGln aGxpZ2h0cykgZW5kKQogICAgICAgICAgICAgIDs7IEVuc3VyZSBmb3J3YXJkIHByb2dyZXNzLiAg YHBvcycgaXMgYSBtYXJrZXIgYmVjYXVzZSBhbmNob3JlZAogICAgICAgICAgICAgIDs7IGtleXdv cmQgbWF5IGFkZC9kZWxldGUgdGV4dCAodGhpcyBoYXBwZW5zIGUuZy4gaW4gZ3JlcC5lbCkuCioq KioqKioqKioqKioqKgoqKiogMTc0MiwxNzQ3ICoqKioKLS0tIDE3NDUsMTc2MSAtLS0tCiAgDAog IDs7IFZhcmlvdXMgZnVuY3Rpb25zLgogIAorIChkZWZ1biBwdXQtdGV4dC1wcm9wZXJ0eS11bmxl c3MtaWdub3JlIChzdGFydCBlbmQgcHJvcGVydHkgdmFsdWUgJm9wdGlvbmFsIG9iamVjdCkKKyAg ICJgcHV0LXRleHQtcHJvcGVydHknLCBidXQgaWdub3JlIHRleHQgd2l0aCBwcm9wZXJ0eSBgZm9u dC1sb2NrLWlnbm9yZScuIgorICAgKGxldCAoKGhlcmUgIChtaW4gc3RhcnQgZW5kKSkKKyAgICAg ICAgIChlbmQxICAobWF4IHN0YXJ0IGVuZCkpCisgICAgICAgICBjaGcpCisgICAgICh3aGlsZSAo PCBoZXJlIGVuZDEpCisgICAgICAgKHNldHEgY2hnICAobmV4dC1zaW5nbGUtcHJvcGVydHktY2hh bmdlIGhlcmUgJ2ZvbnQtbG9jay1pZ25vcmUgb2JqZWN0IGVuZDEpKQorICAgICAgICh1bmxlc3Mg KGdldC10ZXh0LXByb3BlcnR5IGhlcmUgJ2ZvbnQtbG9jay1pZ25vcmUgb2JqZWN0KQorICAgICAg ICAgKHB1dC10ZXh0LXByb3BlcnR5IGhlcmUgY2hnIHByb3BlcnR5IHZhbHVlIG9iamVjdCkpCisg ICAgICAgKHNldHEgaGVyZSAgY2hnKSkpKQorIAogIChkZWZ1biBmb250LWxvY2stY29tcGlsZS1r ZXl3b3JkcyAoa2V5d29yZHMgJm9wdGlvbmFsIHN5bnRhY3RpYy1rZXl3b3JkcykKICAgICJDb21w aWxlIEtFWVdPUkRTIGludG8gdGhlIGZvcm0gKHQgS0VZV09SRFMgQ09NUElMRUQuLi4pCiAgSGVy ZSBlYWNoIENPTVBJTEVEIGlzIG9mIHRoZSBmb3JtIChNQVRDSEVSIEhJR0hMSUdIVCAuLi4pIGFz IHNob3duIGluIHRoZQo= --__1409429562652271229abhmp0018.oracle.com-- From unknown Sat Sep 13 02:08:37 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#18367: 24.4.50; [PATCH] Text property `font-lock-ignore', to protect from font-lock Resent-From: Stefan Monnier Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2014 12:48:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 18367 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Drew Adams Cc: 18367@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 18367-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B18367.140948926416478 (code B ref 18367); Sun, 31 Aug 2014 12:48:02 +0000 Received: (at 18367) by debbugs.gnu.org; 31 Aug 2014 12:47:44 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54828 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XO4Xn-0004Hh-JD for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 31 Aug 2014 08:47:44 -0400 Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.181]:33506) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XO4Xj-0004HS-W2 for 18367@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 31 Aug 2014 08:47:40 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ArkGAIDvNVNFxLul/2dsb2JhbABZgwY7gw+4bByHNYEXF3SCJQEBAQECAQECUyMFCws0EhQUBA0kiAQIDdIMF456B4Q4BJV3hAqPGIFqgXGBWyE X-IPAS-Result: ArkGAIDvNVNFxLul/2dsb2JhbABZgwY7gw+4bByHNYEXF3SCJQEBAQECAQECUyMFCws0EhQUBA0kiAQIDdIMF456B4Q4BJV3hAqPGIFqgXGBWyE X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.97,753,1389762000"; d="scan'208";a="88306055" Received: from 69-196-187-165.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO pastel.home) ([69.196.187.165]) by ironport2-out.teksavvy.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 31 Aug 2014 08:47:34 -0400 Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id AB5AB616FA; Sun, 31 Aug 2014 08:47:33 -0400 (EDT) From: Stefan Monnier Message-ID: References: <86f1a219-9ab5-439f-85ca-936b942cb034@default> Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2014 08:47:33 -0400 In-Reply-To: <86f1a219-9ab5-439f-85ca-936b942cb034@default> (Drew Adams's message of "Sat, 30 Aug 2014 13:12:44 -0700 (PDT)") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.4.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/) > Bug or missing feature: Prevent font-lock from changing text > properties on text that has property `font-lock-ignore'. See > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2014-08/msg00540.html Could you add a short explanation for why font-lock-face is not sufficient? Stefan From unknown Sat Sep 13 02:08:37 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#18367: 24.4.50; [PATCH] Text property `font-lock-ignore', to protect from font-lock Resent-From: Drew Adams Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2014 15:32:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 18367 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Stefan Monnier Cc: 18367@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 18367-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B18367.140949906532477 (code B ref 18367); Sun, 31 Aug 2014 15:32:01 +0000 Received: (at 18367) by debbugs.gnu.org; 31 Aug 2014 15:31:05 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55106 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XO75s-0008Rk-D1 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 31 Aug 2014 11:31:05 -0400 Received: from userp1040.oracle.com ([156.151.31.81]:48988) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XO75p-0008RC-Gb for 18367@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 31 Aug 2014 11:31:02 -0400 Received: from acsinet21.oracle.com (acsinet21.oracle.com [141.146.126.237]) by userp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id s7VFUsE1028788 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Sun, 31 Aug 2014 15:30:55 GMT Received: from userz7021.oracle.com (userz7021.oracle.com [156.151.31.85]) by acsinet21.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s7VFUrGb020215 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Sun, 31 Aug 2014 15:30:54 GMT Received: from abhmp0018.oracle.com (abhmp0018.oracle.com [141.146.116.24]) by userz7021.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s7VFUqwx028812; Sun, 31 Aug 2014 15:30:52 GMT MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2014 08:30:54 -0700 (PDT) From: Drew Adams References: <86f1a219-9ab5-439f-85ca-936b942cb034@default> In-Reply-To: X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.8.2 (807160) [OL 12.0.6691.5000 (x86)] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Source-IP: acsinet21.oracle.com [141.146.126.237] X-Spam-Score: -4.0 (----) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -4.0 (----) > > Bug or missing feature: Prevent font-lock from changing text > > properties on text that has property `font-lock-ignore'. See > > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2014-08/msg00540.html >=20 > Could you add a short explanation for why font-lock-face is > not sufficient? Sorry, but I don't know why it might be imagined sufficient. Can you hint how? IOW, so far, I don't see how it is relevant at all. If you could please hint how one might use `font-lock-face' to protect ad hoc highlighting that uses `face', then I can perhaps try to add a short explanation about that, if you think the bug report is still relevant in that case. But if you really think that `font-lock-face' is sufficient, then why not just close the bug? In that case, however, I would still appreciate knowing how. Trying to see what you might have in mind... I see this in (elisp) `Font Lock Basics' about `font-lock-face': If your mode fontifies text explicitly by adding `font-lock-face' properties, it can specify `(nil t)' for `font-lock-defaults' to turn off all automatic fontification. However, this is not required; it is possible to fontify some things using `font-lock-face' properties and set up automatic fontification for other parts of the text. The last sentence sounds vaguely related (the first sentence seems irrelevant). But it says nothing about how you would do it, so I don't really understand it. And it presumably is, like the first sentence, talking about some mode, whereas there is nothing about any mode in the feature I described (ad hoc highlighting, whether or not the buffer is font-locked). I see this in (elisp) `Search-based Fontification': If it is `prepend', the face specified by FACESPEC is added to the beginning of the `font-lock-face' property. If it is `append', the face is added to the end of the `font-lock-face' property. That too tells me nothing about what the resulting behavior is, or what `font-lock-face' is for. (elisp) `Other Font Lock Variables' says this about it: Variable: font-lock-extra-managed-props This variable specifies additional properties (other than `font-lock-face') that are being managed by Font Lock mode. It is used by `font-lock-default-unfontify-region', which normally only manages the `font-lock-face' property. If you want Font Lock to manage other properties as well, you must specify them in a FACESPEC in `font-lock-keywords' as well as add them to this list. *Note Search-based Fontification::. Again, I'm afraid that tells me nothing about what `font-lock-face' is for or how to use it. It seems to be saying only that `font-lock-face' is removed by `font-lock-default-unfontify-region' and you can change the var to have it also remove other properties. (But the code of that function does not refer to `font-lock-face' at all AFAICT (?).) And it makes the vague statement that `font-lock-face' is "managed by Font Lock mode", whatever that might mean. (elisp) `Precalculated Fontification' says this: Some major modes such as `list-buffers' and `occur' construct the buffer text programmatically. The easiest way for them to support Font Lock mode is to specify the faces of text when they insert the text in the buffer. The way to do this is to specify the faces in the text with the special text property `font-lock-face' (*note Special Properties::). When Font Lock mode is enabled, this property controls the display, just like the `face' property. When Font Lock mode is disabled, `font-lock-face' has no effect on the display. It is ok for a mode to use `font-lock-face' for some text and also use the normal Font Lock machinery. But if the mode does not use the normal Font Lock machinery, it should not set the variable `font-lock-defaults'. That says only (AFAICT) that if some text has property `font-lock-face' then that property "controls the display, just like the `face' property". But it does not say what that means. And it says that when font-lock is disabled, highlighting with `font-lock-face' is also disabled, which is hardly the aim of the feature I proposed. That passage seems to correspond to what I have understood in the past about `font-lock-face': It lets you use font-lock to highlight text, i.e., to have some given highlighting handled by font-lock - to let a major mode "support Font Lock mode". That is opposite to the feature I proposed, AFAICT. Finally, we get to what is presumably the main place (e.g. indexed) that `font-lock-face' is described, (elisp) `Special Properties': `font-lock-face' This property specifies a value for the `face' property that Font Lock mode should apply to the underlying text. It is one of the fontification methods used by Font Lock mode, and is useful for special modes that implement their own highlighting. *Note Precalculated Fontification::. When Font Lock mode is disabled, `font-lock-face' has no effect. That doesn't help me understand, I'm afraid. AFAICT, all it says is that `font-lock-face' is used like `face' by font-lock. I don't see how that text distinguishes it from `face', except in name. (I know that it is distinguished, but that passage does not speak to that.) Coming to the code: Each occurrence of `font-lock-face' in `font-lock.el' simply pairs it with `face', treating the two the same way. These are the only occurrences there: font-lock.el:1378: (and (memq prop '(face font-lock-face)) font-lock.el:1398: (and (memq prop '(face font-lock-face)) If I look at how `font-lock-face' is used elsewhere in the code, e.g. in `occur' (as suggested by (elisp) `Precalculated Fontification'), it seems that the use case for it is to apply a face to text in an ad hoc way (good), i.e., other than by using `font-lock-keywords', and yet to have font-lock effect/control that highlighting (bad, er, not the feature I have in mind). And that is exactly what I have understood for `font-lock-face' in the past: You can apply it to text any way you like, without bothering with `font-lock-keywords', and yet font-lock will "control" it: turning font-lock on shows the highlighting; turning font-lock off hides it. IOW, AFAICT, it is a way to get font-lock to control additional (e.g. ad hoc) highlighting, beyond the control provided by `font-lock-keywords'. Presumably the reason for using a different property from `face' for this is so that font-lock does not turn on/off all `face'-propertied text, in particular, so that `font-lock-mode' need not be on for some `face'-propertied text to be highlighted. Of course, that does not prevent font-lock from turning OFF other highlighting, which is the point of the feature I proposed. If I have understood correctly, giving font-lock control over additional (e.g. non `font-lock-keywords') highlighting is what `font-lock-face' is for. And in that case it is opposite to the feature I propose, which is to remove font-lock control over given ad hoc highlighting. Please let me know what I am missing or misunderstand. From unknown Sat Sep 13 02:08:37 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#18367: 24.4.50; [PATCH] Text property `font-lock-ignore', to protect from font-lock Resent-From: Stefan Monnier Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2014 20:10:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 18367 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Drew Adams Cc: 18367@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 18367-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B18367.140951575325943 (code B ref 18367); Sun, 31 Aug 2014 20:10:02 +0000 Received: (at 18367) by debbugs.gnu.org; 31 Aug 2014 20:09:13 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55153 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XOBR3-0006kM-3n for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 31 Aug 2014 16:09:13 -0400 Received: from relais.videotron.ca ([24.201.245.36]:10608) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XOBR1-0006k9-Gw for 18367@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 31 Aug 2014 16:09:11 -0400 MIME-version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII Received: from fmsmemgm.homelinux.net ([24.37.3.82]) by VL-VM-MR001.ip.videotron.ca (Oracle Communications Messaging Exchange Server 7u4-22.01 64bit (built Apr 21 2011)) with ESMTP id <0NB600COVTB08860@VL-VM-MR001.ip.videotron.ca> for 18367@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 31 Aug 2014 16:09:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: by fmsmemgm.homelinux.net (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 97A14AE171; Sun, 31 Aug 2014 16:08:59 -0400 (EDT) From: Stefan Monnier Message-id: References: <86f1a219-9ab5-439f-85ca-936b942cb034@default> Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2014 16:08:59 -0400 In-reply-to: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.4.50 (gnu/linux) X-Spam-Score: 1.0 (+) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: 1.0 (+) >> Could you add a short explanation for why font-lock-face is >> not sufficient? > Sorry, but I don't know why it might be imagined sufficient. Can you please just answer the damn question? Stefan From unknown Sat Sep 13 02:08:37 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#18367: 24.4.50; [PATCH] Text property `font-lock-ignore', to protect from font-lock Resent-From: Drew Adams Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2014 20:57:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 18367 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Stefan Monnier Cc: 18367@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 18367-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B18367.140951860230563 (code B ref 18367); Sun, 31 Aug 2014 20:57:02 +0000 Received: (at 18367) by debbugs.gnu.org; 31 Aug 2014 20:56:42 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55159 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XOCAz-0007wr-Qu for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 31 Aug 2014 16:56:42 -0400 Received: from aserp1040.oracle.com ([141.146.126.69]:22159) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XOCAw-0007wZ-49 for 18367@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 31 Aug 2014 16:56:38 -0400 Received: from ucsinet22.oracle.com (ucsinet22.oracle.com [156.151.31.94]) by aserp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id s7VKuUwi007572 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Sun, 31 Aug 2014 20:56:31 GMT Received: from userz7021.oracle.com (userz7021.oracle.com [156.151.31.85]) by ucsinet22.oracle.com (8.14.5+Sun/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s7VKuS76027553 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Sun, 31 Aug 2014 20:56:30 GMT Received: from abhmp0014.oracle.com (abhmp0014.oracle.com [141.146.116.20]) by userz7021.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s7VKuSEZ009319; Sun, 31 Aug 2014 20:56:28 GMT MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2014 13:56:29 -0700 (PDT) From: Drew Adams References: <86f1a219-9ab5-439f-85ca-936b942cb034@default> In-Reply-To: X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.8.2 (807160) [OL 12.0.6691.5000 (x86)] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Source-IP: ucsinet22.oracle.com [156.151.31.94] X-Spam-Score: -4.0 (----) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -4.0 (----) > >> Could you add a short explanation for why font-lock-face is > >> not sufficient? > > > > Sorry, but I don't know why it might be imagined sufficient. >=20 > Can you please just answer the damn question? Can you please control your nastiness? I answered your "damn" question to the best of my ability, trying to guess what you mean by it. I do not claim to be an expert on `font-lock-face', and I did not mention it in my bug report. I have no idea why you think `font-lock-face' is sufficient for the feature I requested - how (you think) it provides it. I'm not a mind reader. I listed several ways in which (I think) `font-lock-face' is unrelated to the feature and does not provide it. Apparently that is not enough for you. In that case, please say how you see `font-lock-face' as being sufficient to provide the feature. What, in your eyes, is the relation between `font-lock-face' and the requested feature? If you do that then I will hopefully understand what you have in mind, and I will hopefully be able to show why I think you are wrong (i.e., show why `font-lock-face' is not sufficient), in the terms you will have expressed. Or perhaps then I will agree with you that `font-lock-face' is sufficient to realize the feature. But without your saying anything about what you mean, I cannot speak more to your vague (and now nasty) inquiry. So far, nothing from you - only heat, no light. From unknown Sat Sep 13 02:08:37 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#18367: 24.4.50; [PATCH] Text property `font-lock-ignore', to protect from font-lock Resent-From: Wolfgang Jenkner Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2014 18:47:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 18367 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Drew Adams Cc: 18367@debbugs.gnu.org, Stefan Monnier Received: via spool by 18367-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B18367.14095971699747 (code B ref 18367); Mon, 01 Sep 2014 18:47:02 +0000 Received: (at 18367) by debbugs.gnu.org; 1 Sep 2014 18:46:09 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55876 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XOWcD-0002X7-EI for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 01 Sep 2014 14:46:09 -0400 Received: from b2bfep15.mx.upcmail.net ([62.179.121.60]:47942) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XOWcA-0002WU-KY for 18367@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 01 Sep 2014 14:46:07 -0400 Received: from edge12.upcmail.net ([192.168.13.82]) by b2bfep15-int.chello.at (InterMail vM.8.01.05.05 201-2260-151-110-20120111) with ESMTP id <20140901184559.CSSD28336.b2bfep15-int.chello.at@edge12.upcmail.net> for <18367@debbugs.gnu.org>; Mon, 1 Sep 2014 20:45:59 +0200 Received: from iznogoud.viz ([91.119.88.190]) by edge12.upcmail.net with edge id luly1o00n46QafP0CulyhQ; Mon, 01 Sep 2014 20:45:59 +0200 X-SourceIP: 91.119.88.190 Received: from wolfgang by iznogoud.viz with local (Exim 4.84 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1XOWc2-0000P1-IT; Mon, 01 Sep 2014 20:45:58 +0200 From: Wolfgang Jenkner References: <86f1a219-9ab5-439f-85ca-936b942cb034@default> Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2014 20:45:58 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Drew Adams's message of "Sun, 31 Aug 2014 08:30:54 -0700 (PDT)") Message-ID: <85mwajb2mx.fsf@iznogoud.viz> User-Agent: Gnus/5.130012 (Ma Gnus v0.12) Emacs/24.4.50 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) On Sun, Aug 31 2014, Drew Adams wrote: > (elisp) `Other Font Lock Variables' says this about it: > > Variable: font-lock-extra-managed-props > This variable specifies additional properties (other than > `font-lock-face') that are being managed by Font Lock mode. It is > used by `font-lock-default-unfontify-region', which normally only > manages the `font-lock-face' property. If you want Font Lock to > manage other properties as well, you must specify them in a > FACESPEC in `font-lock-keywords' as well as add them to this list. > *Note Search-based Fontification::. I think `font-lock-face' is a typo here (it should read `face'). It is clear from looking a the code (or doing some experiments) that font-lock-default-unfontify-region doesn't remove the `font-lock-face' property. Wolfgang From unknown Sat Sep 13 02:08:37 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#18367: 24.4.50; [PATCH] Text property `font-lock-ignore', to protect from font-lock Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2014 19:09:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 18367 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Wolfgang Jenkner Cc: 18367@debbugs.gnu.org, drew.adams@oracle.com Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii Received: via spool by 18367-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B18367.140959848711824 (code B ref 18367); Mon, 01 Sep 2014 19:09:01 +0000 Received: (at 18367) by debbugs.gnu.org; 1 Sep 2014 19:08:07 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55883 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XOWxS-00034e-EB for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 01 Sep 2014 15:08:06 -0400 Received: from mtaout20.012.net.il ([80.179.55.166]:49366) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XOWxO-000344-8h for 18367@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 01 Sep 2014 15:08:04 -0400 Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout20.012.net.il by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0NB800E00KTV3F00@a-mtaout20.012.net.il> for 18367@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 01 Sep 2014 22:07:55 +0300 (IDT) Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0NB800DQ6L57LL90@a-mtaout20.012.net.il>; Mon, 01 Sep 2014 22:07:55 +0300 (IDT) Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2014 22:08:03 +0300 From: Eli Zaretskii In-reply-to: <85mwajb2mx.fsf@iznogoud.viz> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il Message-id: <83sikbf9bg.fsf@gnu.org> References: <86f1a219-9ab5-439f-85ca-936b942cb034@default> <85mwajb2mx.fsf@iznogoud.viz> X-Spam-Score: 1.0 (+) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: 1.0 (+) > From: Wolfgang Jenkner > Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2014 20:45:58 +0200 > Cc: 18367@debbugs.gnu.org > > On Sun, Aug 31 2014, Drew Adams wrote: > > > (elisp) `Other Font Lock Variables' says this about it: > > > > Variable: font-lock-extra-managed-props > > This variable specifies additional properties (other than > > `font-lock-face') that are being managed by Font Lock mode. It is > > used by `font-lock-default-unfontify-region', which normally only > > manages the `font-lock-face' property. If you want Font Lock to > > manage other properties as well, you must specify them in a > > FACESPEC in `font-lock-keywords' as well as add them to this list. > > *Note Search-based Fontification::. > > I think `font-lock-face' is a typo here (it should read `face'). > > It is clear from looking a the code (or doing some experiments) that > font-lock-default-unfontify-region doesn't remove the `font-lock-face' > property. The "it" in that text alludes to font-lock-extra-managed-props, not to font-lock-face. After all, the former is what is being documented in the text you cited; the latter is just mentioned because font-lock-face is another kind of specification of "additional" properties of interest to Font Lock. From unknown Sat Sep 13 02:08:37 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#18367: 24.4.50; [PATCH] Text property `font-lock-ignore', to protect from font-lock In-Reply-To: <86f1a219-9ab5-439f-85ca-936b942cb034@default> Resent-From: Wolfgang Jenkner Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2014 19:44:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 18367 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: 18367@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 18367-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B18367.140960062215311 (code B ref 18367); Mon, 01 Sep 2014 19:44:01 +0000 Received: (at 18367) by debbugs.gnu.org; 1 Sep 2014 19:43:42 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55909 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XOXVt-0003ys-Tu for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 01 Sep 2014 15:43:42 -0400 Received: from b2bfep16.mx.upcmail.net ([62.179.121.61]:54699) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XOXVr-0003yb-2r for 18367@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 01 Sep 2014 15:43:40 -0400 Received: from edge12.upcmail.net ([192.168.13.82]) by b2bfep16-int.chello.at (InterMail vM.8.01.05.05 201-2260-151-110-20120111) with ESMTP id <20140901194332.CGLE22864.b2bfep16-int.chello.at@edge12.upcmail.net> for <18367@debbugs.gnu.org>; Mon, 1 Sep 2014 21:43:32 +0200 Received: from iznogoud.viz ([91.119.88.190]) by edge12.upcmail.net with edge id lvjX1o00z46QafP0CvjX6t; Mon, 01 Sep 2014 21:43:32 +0200 X-SourceIP: 91.119.88.190 Received: from wolfgang by iznogoud.viz with local (Exim 4.84 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1XOXVj-0000Qs-Eb; Mon, 01 Sep 2014 21:43:31 +0200 From: Wolfgang Jenkner References: <86f1a219-9ab5-439f-85ca-936b942cb034@default> <85mwajb2mx.fsf@iznogoud.viz> <83sikbf9bg.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2014 21:43:31 +0200 Message-ID: <85a96jazz0.fsf@iznogoud.viz> User-Agent: Gnus/5.130012 (Ma Gnus v0.12) Emacs/24.4.50 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) On Mon, Sep 01 2014, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> From: Wolfgang Jenkner >> Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2014 20:45:58 +0200 >> Cc: 18367@debbugs.gnu.org >> >> On Sun, Aug 31 2014, Drew Adams wrote: >> >> > (elisp) `Other Font Lock Variables' says this about it: >> > >> > Variable: font-lock-extra-managed-props >> > This variable specifies additional properties (other than >> > `font-lock-face') that are being managed by Font Lock mode. It is >> > used by `font-lock-default-unfontify-region', which normally only >> > manages the `font-lock-face' property. If you want Font Lock to >> > manage other properties as well, you must specify them in a >> > FACESPEC in `font-lock-keywords' as well as add them to this list. >> > *Note Search-based Fontification::. >> >> I think `font-lock-face' is a typo here (it should read `face'). >> >> It is clear from looking a the code (or doing some experiments) that >> font-lock-default-unfontify-region doesn't remove the `font-lock-face' >> property. > > The "it" in that text alludes to font-lock-extra-managed-props, not to > font-lock-face. I don't think the "it" is a problem here. > After all, the former is what is being documented in > the text you cited; the latter is just mentioned because > font-lock-face is another kind of specification of "additional" > properties of interest to Font Lock. But, `font-lock-face' is of no interest to font-lock-default-unfontify-region, the `face' property is. font-lock-default-unfontify-region does not remove the `font-lock-face' property, it removes the `face' property. font-lock-default-unfontify-region does not "manage" the `font-lock-face' property, it "manages" the `face' property. Sorry, for saying three times the same thing, but Drew cited this part of the manual and it seems to be the reason why Stefan's request didn't make sense to him. Wolfgang From unknown Sat Sep 13 02:08:37 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#18367: 24.4.50; [PATCH] Text property `font-lock-ignore', to protect from font-lock Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2014 20:05:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 18367 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Wolfgang Jenkner Cc: 18367@debbugs.gnu.org Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii Received: via spool by 18367-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B18367.140960186917338 (code B ref 18367); Mon, 01 Sep 2014 20:05:01 +0000 Received: (at 18367) by debbugs.gnu.org; 1 Sep 2014 20:04:29 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55916 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XOXq1-0004Va-5V for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 01 Sep 2014 16:04:29 -0400 Received: from mtaout28.012.net.il ([80.179.55.184]:49998) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XOXpy-0004VJ-GK for 18367@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 01 Sep 2014 16:04:27 -0400 Received: from conversion-daemon.mtaout28.012.net.il by mtaout28.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0NB800300N7WUQ00@mtaout28.012.net.il> for 18367@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 01 Sep 2014 23:03:12 +0300 (IDT) Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by mtaout28.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0NB8004K6NPC8C10@mtaout28.012.net.il>; Mon, 01 Sep 2014 23:03:12 +0300 (IDT) Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2014 23:04:27 +0300 From: Eli Zaretskii In-reply-to: <85a96jazz0.fsf@iznogoud.viz> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il Message-id: <83r3zvf6pg.fsf@gnu.org> References: <86f1a219-9ab5-439f-85ca-936b942cb034@default> <85mwajb2mx.fsf@iznogoud.viz> <83sikbf9bg.fsf@gnu.org> <85a96jazz0.fsf@iznogoud.viz> X-Spam-Score: 1.0 (+) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: 1.0 (+) > From: Wolfgang Jenkner > Cc: 18367@debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2014 21:43:31 +0200 > > > The "it" in that text alludes to font-lock-extra-managed-props, not to > > font-lock-face. > > I don't think the "it" is a problem here. > > > After all, the former is what is being documented in > > the text you cited; the latter is just mentioned because > > font-lock-face is another kind of specification of "additional" > > properties of interest to Font Lock. > > But, `font-lock-face' is of no interest to > font-lock-default-unfontify-region, the `face' property is. > > font-lock-default-unfontify-region does not remove the `font-lock-face' > property, it removes the `face' property. > > font-lock-default-unfontify-region does not "manage" the > `font-lock-face' property, it "manages" the `face' property. The cited text says that font-lock-default-unfontify-region uses font-lock-extra-managed-props. That is all it says; all the rest is just comments and references to related features . From unknown Sat Sep 13 02:08:37 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#18367: 24.4.50; [PATCH] Text property `font-lock-ignore', to protect from font-lock Resent-From: Michael Heerdegen Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 16:47:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 18367 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Stefan Monnier Cc: 18367@debbugs.gnu.org, Drew Adams Reply-To: michael_heerdegen@web.de Received: via spool by 18367-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B18367.141209557031318 (code B ref 18367); Tue, 30 Sep 2014 16:47:01 +0000 Received: (at 18367) by debbugs.gnu.org; 30 Sep 2014 16:46:10 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56534 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XZ0Yz-000893-GP for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 30 Sep 2014 12:46:09 -0400 Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.17.12]:63976) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XZ0Yw-00088u-D5 for 18367@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 30 Sep 2014 12:46:07 -0400 Received: from drachen.dragon ([90.187.50.220]) by smtp.web.de (mrweb101) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0M8i11-1YThmm2CiB-00wEcA; Tue, 30 Sep 2014 18:46:00 +0200 From: Michael Heerdegen References: <86f1a219-9ab5-439f-85ca-936b942cb034@default> Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 18:45:30 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Stefan Monnier's message of "Sun, 31 Aug 2014 08:47:33 -0400") Message-ID: <87iok5t5ud.fsf@web.de> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.4.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:IwG5vQ31CDmbCkv/MB/nqebvtq+2iWVUy/Cwl9nTAekQbdVwNWL t708jiL5CosmzFzqazWzmbLSoDqnzaYtaf60nS/uBxRBk4DsnIaSZVdStZgvRz8+UL3uxFa zNLRJLRNoOLI7mqFvHZfDxyNnN7dZTf4JoKAS/CEFmLN0wyG43NpT0cvvAZxgGBzwd6RxuE qeH9u22TJ5sfzqxF6Xt5Q== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1; X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) Stefan Monnier writes: > > Bug or missing feature: Prevent font-lock from changing text > > properties on text that has property `font-lock-ignore'. See > > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2014-08/msg00540.html > > Could you add a short explanation for why font-lock-face is > not sufficient? I'm not sure about that question. But I see a problem in cases where packages use the 'face property without using font-lock (e.g. Helm does this in its Completions buffer) and other packages come and invoke font-lock in such a buffer (like e.g. rainbow-delimiters does/did in it's globalized mode). In such a case, all the fontification with 'face is erased. I guess it is an error to use 'face in any buffer that could become subject to font-locking caused by some mode or package. If that's the case - if it is recommended to use font-lock-face in all these situations, we should say in the manual that 'face is dangerous to use in such situations: (info "(elisp) Special Properties") Michael. From unknown Sat Sep 13 02:08:37 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#18367: 24.4.50; [PATCH] Text property `font-lock-ignore', to protect from font-lock Resent-From: Drew Adams Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 17:15:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 18367 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: michael_heerdegen@web.de, Stefan Monnier Cc: 18367@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 18367-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B18367.14120972801469 (code B ref 18367); Tue, 30 Sep 2014 17:15:02 +0000 Received: (at 18367) by debbugs.gnu.org; 30 Sep 2014 17:14:40 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56548 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XZ10Z-0000Nc-UK for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 30 Sep 2014 13:14:40 -0400 Received: from userp1040.oracle.com ([156.151.31.81]:43639) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XZ10X-0000NT-4q for 18367@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 30 Sep 2014 13:14:38 -0400 Received: from acsinet21.oracle.com (acsinet21.oracle.com [141.146.126.237]) by userp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id s8UHEYq7026947 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 30 Sep 2014 17:14:35 GMT Received: from userz7021.oracle.com (userz7021.oracle.com [156.151.31.85]) by acsinet21.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s8UHEWvQ013960 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 30 Sep 2014 17:14:33 GMT Received: from abhmp0013.oracle.com (abhmp0013.oracle.com [141.146.116.19]) by userz7021.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s8UHEW47003112; Tue, 30 Sep 2014 17:14:32 GMT MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 10:14:31 -0700 (PDT) From: Drew Adams References: <86f1a219-9ab5-439f-85ca-936b942cb034@default> <87iok5t5ud.fsf@web.de> In-Reply-To: <87iok5t5ud.fsf@web.de> X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.8.2 (807160) [OL 12.0.6691.5000 (x86)] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Source-IP: acsinet21.oracle.com [141.146.126.237] X-Spam-Score: -3.0 (---) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.0 (---) > > > Bug or missing feature: Prevent font-lock from changing text > > > properties on text that has property `font-lock-ignore'. See > > > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2014- > > > 08/msg00540.html > > > > Could you add a short explanation for why font-lock-face is > > not sufficient? >=20 > I'm not sure about that question. But I see a problem in cases > where packages use the 'face property without using font-lock... > and other packages come and invoke font-lock in such a buffer.... > In such a case, all the fontification with 'face is erased. >=20 > I guess it is an error to use 'face in any buffer that could become > subject to font-locking caused by some mode or package. If that's > the case - if it is recommended to use font-lock-face in all these > situations, we should say in the manual that 'face is dangerous to > use in such situations: (info "(elisp) Special Properties") It should not be "an error" to use `face' in a font-locked buffer. That's precisely the problem, IMO: Font-lock has taken over property `face'. That's not right. It does not (should not) own `face'. There should at least be a simple way to say "Hands off this occurrence of `face'!" From unknown Sat Sep 13 02:08:37 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#18367: 24.4.50; [PATCH] Text property `font-lock-ignore', to protect from font-lock Resent-From: Drew Adams Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2015 16:59:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 18367 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: michael_heerdegen@web.de, Stefan Monnier Cc: 18367@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 18367-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B18367.143481951122963 (code B ref 18367); Sat, 20 Jun 2015 16:59:02 +0000 Received: (at 18367) by debbugs.gnu.org; 20 Jun 2015 16:58:31 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52818 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Z6M6A-0005yJ-MY for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 20 Jun 2015 12:58:31 -0400 Received: from userp1040.oracle.com ([156.151.31.81]:44609) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Z6M69-0005y5-45 for 18367@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 20 Jun 2015 12:58:29 -0400 Received: from userv0021.oracle.com (userv0021.oracle.com [156.151.31.71]) by userp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id t5KGwLMl014440 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Sat, 20 Jun 2015 16:58:22 GMT Received: from userv0122.oracle.com (userv0122.oracle.com [156.151.31.75]) by userv0021.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t5KGwJcn001914 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Sat, 20 Jun 2015 16:58:19 GMT Received: from abhmp0005.oracle.com (abhmp0005.oracle.com [141.146.116.11]) by userv0122.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t5KGwJ62007364; Sat, 20 Jun 2015 16:58:19 GMT MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <2a18392d-4a8c-433d-9b93-0e607bcb4299@default> Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2015 09:58:20 -0700 (PDT) From: Drew Adams References: <86f1a219-9ab5-439f-85ca-936b942cb034@default> <87iok5t5ud.fsf@web.de> In-Reply-To: X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9 (901082) [OL 12.0.6691.5000 (x86)] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Source-IP: userv0021.oracle.com [156.151.31.71] X-Spam-Score: -2.9 (--) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -2.9 (--) Let me try refreshing this. It seems that people are mistaking adding a property to `font-lock-extra-managed-props', or using `font-lock-face' instead of `face', as a solution to the problem that the proposed patch fixes. It is not. I stated the essential difference in the emacs-devel thread that is associated with this bug: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2014-08/msg00583.html What I am talking about is the opposite: Not giving font-lock control over additional, ad hoc highlighting, but taking font-lock control away, for given ad hoc highlighting. I don't want turning font-lock on or off to affect the given highlighting at all. That's the point. It's not that I'm looking for a way to let font-lock control some non-`font-lock-keywords' highlighting. That we can do already, using property `font-lock-face'. And we can also do that already by adding a given property to `font-lock-extra-managed-props'. The point of the patch I sent is to let you really tell font-lock "hands-off" anywhere you like, i.e., make it so that font-lock-mode has no effect on the given text. Again: "I don't want turning font-lock on or off to affect the given highlighting at all." So how about it? How about applying the simple code change that fixes this? From unknown Sat Sep 13 02:08:37 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#18367: 24.4.50; [PATCH] Text property `font-lock-ignore', to protect from font-lock Resent-From: Lars Ingebrigtsen Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2016 13:45:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 18367 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Drew Adams Cc: michael_heerdegen@web.de, 18367@debbugs.gnu.org, Stefan Monnier Received: via spool by 18367-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B18367.146202389929210 (code B ref 18367); Sat, 30 Apr 2016 13:45:01 +0000 Received: (at 18367) by debbugs.gnu.org; 30 Apr 2016 13:44:59 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56509 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1awVCd-0007b4-CM for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 30 Apr 2016 09:44:59 -0400 Received: from hermes.netfonds.no ([80.91.224.195]:56750) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1awVCc-0007au-8R for 18367@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 30 Apr 2016 09:44:58 -0400 Received: from cm-84.215.1.64.getinternet.no ([84.215.1.64] helo=mouse) by hermes.netfonds.no with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1awVCX-0002nU-3j; Sat, 30 Apr 2016 15:44:55 +0200 From: Lars Ingebrigtsen References: <86f1a219-9ab5-439f-85ca-936b942cb034@default> <87iok5t5ud.fsf@web.de> Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2016 15:44:52 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Drew Adams's message of "Tue, 30 Sep 2014 10:14:31 -0700 (PDT)") Message-ID: <87zisbqkh7.fsf@gnus.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) Drew Adams writes: > It should not be "an error" to use `face' in a font-locked buffer. I think that ship has sailed a long time ago. Closing. -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sat Apr 30 09:45:03 2016 Received: (at control) by debbugs.gnu.org; 30 Apr 2016 13:45:03 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56513 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1awVCh-0007dr-KI for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 30 Apr 2016 09:45:03 -0400 Received: from hermes.netfonds.no ([80.91.224.195]:56759) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1awVCf-0007bP-Nk for control@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 30 Apr 2016 09:45:01 -0400 Received: from cm-84.215.1.64.getinternet.no ([84.215.1.64] helo=mouse) by hermes.netfonds.no with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1awVCd-0002nb-E1 for control@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 30 Apr 2016 15:45:01 +0200 Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2016 15:44:58 +0200 Message-Id: <87y47vqkh1.fsf@gnus.org> To: control@debbugs.gnu.org From: Lars Ingebrigtsen Subject: control message for bug #18367 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: control X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) tags 18367 wontfix close 18367 From unknown Sat Sep 13 02:08:37 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#18367: 24.4.50; [PATCH] Text property `font-lock-ignore', to protect from font-lock Resent-From: Stefan Monnier Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2016 14:29:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 18367 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: wontfix To: Drew Adams Cc: michael_heerdegen@web.de, 18367@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 18367-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B18367.146202651122073 (code B ref 18367); Sat, 30 Apr 2016 14:29:01 +0000 Received: (at 18367) by debbugs.gnu.org; 30 Apr 2016 14:28:31 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57849 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1awVsl-0005jx-LK for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 30 Apr 2016 10:28:31 -0400 Received: from pruche.dit.umontreal.ca ([132.204.246.22]:48998) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1awVsj-0005jp-PT for 18367@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 30 Apr 2016 10:28:30 -0400 Received: from ceviche.home (lechon.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.27.242]) by pruche.dit.umontreal.ca (8.14.7/8.14.1) with ESMTP id u3UESR3I003914; Sat, 30 Apr 2016 10:28:27 -0400 Received: by ceviche.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id B01DE66162; Sat, 30 Apr 2016 10:28:58 -0400 (EDT) From: Stefan Monnier Message-ID: References: <86f1a219-9ab5-439f-85ca-936b942cb034@default> <87iok5t5ud.fsf@web.de> Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2016 10:28:58 -0400 In-Reply-To: (Drew Adams's message of "Tue, 30 Sep 2014 10:14:31 -0700 (PDT)") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-NAI-Spam-Flag: NO X-NAI-Spam-Threshold: 5 X-NAI-Spam-Score: 0 X-NAI-Spam-Rules: 1 Rules triggered RV5658=0 X-NAI-Spam-Version: 2.3.0.9418 : core <5658> : inlines <4747> : streams <1627765> : uri <2200342> X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) > It should not be "an error" to use `face' in a font-locked buffer. FWIW, I agree. That's a big part of the motivation behind my proposal to add *** Several text-property planes in etc/TODO. But currently the only "solution" to the above problem is `font-lock-face` (tho it only solves the problem if it's OK for your face to be disabled when font-lock-mode is disabled). Stefan From unknown Sat Sep 13 02:08:37 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#18367: 24.4.50; [PATCH] Text property `font-lock-ignore', to protect from font-lock Resent-From: Drew Adams Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2016 16:33:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 18367 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: wontfix To: Lars Ingebrigtsen Cc: michael_heerdegen@web.de, 18367@debbugs.gnu.org, Stefan Monnier Received: via spool by 18367-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B18367.146203397621080 (code B ref 18367); Sat, 30 Apr 2016 16:33:02 +0000 Received: (at 18367) by debbugs.gnu.org; 30 Apr 2016 16:32:56 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58120 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1awXpA-0005Tw-Ir for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 30 Apr 2016 12:32:56 -0400 Received: from aserp1040.oracle.com ([141.146.126.69]:34275) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1awXp9-0005Th-0w for 18367@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 30 Apr 2016 12:32:55 -0400 Received: from aserv0021.oracle.com (aserv0021.oracle.com [141.146.126.233]) by aserp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id u3UGWmLm001405 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Sat, 30 Apr 2016 16:32:48 GMT Received: from aserv0122.oracle.com (aserv0122.oracle.com [141.146.126.236]) by aserv0021.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u3UGWlPI027447 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Sat, 30 Apr 2016 16:32:47 GMT Received: from abhmp0019.oracle.com (abhmp0019.oracle.com [141.146.116.25]) by aserv0122.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u3UGWi9C024963; Sat, 30 Apr 2016 16:32:45 GMT MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2016 08:32:43 -0800 (GMT-08:00) From: Drew Adams References: <86f1a219-9ab5-439f-85ca-936b942cb034@default> <87iok5t5ud.fsf@web.de> <87zisbqkh7.fsf@gnus.org> In-Reply-To: <87zisbqkh7.fsf@gnus.org> X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9 (901082) [OL 12.0.6744.5000 (x86)] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Source-IP: aserv0021.oracle.com [141.146.126.233] X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > > It should not be "an error" to use `face' in a font-locked buffer. >=20 > I think that ship has sailed a long time ago. Closing. It has not sailed. The patch does not take anything away from the use of `font-lock-face' or `font-lock-extra-managed-props'. It just adds additional control, and it does so simply. As stated earlier: It seems that people are mistaking adding a property to `font-lock-extra-managed-props', or using `font-lock-face' instead of `face', as a solution to the problem that the proposed patch fixes. They do not solve the same problem. This problem and solution are independent of the problem and solution behind the existence of `font-lock-face' and `font-lock-extra-managed-props'. What I am talking about is the opposite [of using `font-lock-face' or `font-lock-extra-managed-props']: Not giving font-lock control over additional, ad hoc highlighting, but taking font-lock control away, for given ad hoc highlighting. I don't want turning font-lock on or off to affect the given highlighting at all. That's the point. It's not that I'm looking for a way to let font-lock control some non-`font-lock-keywords' highlighting. That we can do already, using property `font-lock-face' [or by adding a given property to `font-lock-extra-managed-props'].