From unknown Sat Jun 21 10:15:43 2025 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.509 (Entity 5.509) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 From: bug#25592 <25592@debbugs.gnu.org> To: bug#25592 <25592@debbugs.gnu.org> Subject: Status: Feature request: sorting overlays Reply-To: bug#25592 <25592@debbugs.gnu.org> Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2025 17:15:43 +0000 retitle 25592 Feature request: sorting overlays reassign 25592 emacs submitter 25592 Cl=C3=A9ment Pit--Claudel severity 25592 wishlist thanks From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Jan 31 15:32:50 2017 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 31 Jan 2017 20:32:50 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52586 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cYf6f-000386-PW for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 31 Jan 2017 15:32:49 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:38178) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cYf6d-00037s-JL for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 31 Jan 2017 15:32:48 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cYf6X-0007aH-HG for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 31 Jan 2017 15:32:42 -0500 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,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::11]:56101) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cYf6X-0007aD-EP for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 31 Jan 2017 15:32:41 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57382) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cYf6W-0000tv-5n for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 31 Jan 2017 15:32:40 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cYf6S-0007XU-8k for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 31 Jan 2017 15:32:40 -0500 Received: from mout.kundenserver.de ([212.227.17.24]:64918) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cYf6R-0007T4-U2 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 31 Jan 2017 15:32:36 -0500 Received: from [18.26.2.123] ([18.26.2.123]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (mreue101 [212.227.15.184]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MhDJh-1cm3E00Z7J-00MOkz for ; Tue, 31 Jan 2017 21:32:33 +0100 To: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org From: =?UTF-8?Q?Cl=c3=a9ment_Pit--Claudel?= Subject: Feature request: sorting overlays Message-ID: Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2017 15:32:26 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="un9Las0PKBj6sqeSpmPXfF2ioAhnsWSeR" X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:fzKf7wiDcAuNeyGu2FeoawrG1aUlti3YFU2N7pxCnT8+0XWtiCb 8nGMKCKKS+NKoQDhooiGPCZ8PLVBR13vskt8vtc2BLNbGIr8cbmcaCu0Fr47tnaprAyT0+y LL5Pd+DbNWP4XwqMa9Pedown0QR75rRt1iA3XupVc/5QJxlUHoLRwLtCAAGnBZ7F952P6xJ MIQWB9j/NDIyjN9xURaWQ== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:D0nAK0N1Jeg=:sok5vB3Y/HwD5A8kSUJiLa XLX6T6isvK8KS8DBHgROAqQqrCPBSrbHOGajHEkmn7JZl0YhdstyCidhEJ8lUXtoLwDjpQT17 Czavlu3cxMtvEplxO8ONCQfQXr03lomEYSRURhtXwI27sEq/FPLgjDNn/cX0ceFzalnUk8ty2 0kismsCvTEeRn0MHBEfYfkGnT0laUgOjGvYB6Q+N/Bw/fXU68/xldc0BLY7Kwhu5CemvnU91d 9oU+7ROgeBQwlYs8GAXdLXM2tTfQyZBfBhjc9kQzm4mHXOSL71RPie0CixkXlcdCFDCz4JGfA E1MvUzBI1oxCk7LSYm7RtPYcG6U+XMLiNIpJ7GuWI+gn7ffX6D78xFU+Vvu+TO24HNhVJZNzx WdT/nf+S6+5iKMjMxiuX0Rb9O3WvxOPBZE3LgY1tFy0tyRFJyUgVUO/oJAR1qZNrteh+8I0CE eVMKBTQEyWrd79SlOXYmEipYmOJSFUm+ZLKm4w5caRJ7SbHg2F208js0rr3nalC+WMLG93f0W b/DdHtPtlUloibsshxhEIN0YOW3IWPfVYZbssohfPD9kJ0OlQYZAfyR6/tjQCpZje94rMSD5Z uQBtRs6fY5zl+sRv0Q6e7HJ4VsKfN+WXtQjCOd4UAcnxrn0ubok4tMChhKjHrwyqOkJGZmqex nNdGPkNjIHUpfwumMvVJaUPZOP+QIZQ6q/oT4uMsKBkAb2INjGHZoVWeJFqakUEY/De4= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::11 X-Spam-Score: -4.0 (----) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit 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: -4.0 (----) This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --un9Las0PKBj6sqeSpmPXfF2ioAhnsWSeR Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="KoFKiKn9XBqOOKwqnCOSvofllBiWfWxuH"; protected-headers="v1" From: =?UTF-8?Q?Cl=c3=a9ment_Pit--Claudel?= To: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Message-ID: Subject: Feature request: sorting overlays --KoFKiKn9XBqOOKwqnCOSvofllBiWfWxuH Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, Is there a way to get a list of all overlays in a buffer, sorted by prior= ity? Currently only overlays-at seems to have a sorted parameter, and the sort= ing is done in C (so there seems to be no way on the list side to sort th= e results of overlays-in, except for reimplementing compare_overlays). Thanks! Cl=C3=A9ment --KoFKiKn9XBqOOKwqnCOSvofllBiWfWxuH-- --un9Las0PKBj6sqeSpmPXfF2ioAhnsWSeR Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJYkPRfAAoJEPqg+cTm90wj6zcP/08SoqBZ8K0kYkwjKrAftt0r XCGZKt2fWJQrVIhxGPQZnYG/kDY1GCaajZHdeu+scodywJZWfX2jiMaYI2mV3wEI z0LTVPKuvCeB1BkuXQDpXzBaNxF7D9NoGUhGp4xgdE2HofhZmAnTdJukpaYHBR88 P2yhjkL7eeOXw4btri//Kw5/wTeILqi0avRZcwEIB3/lS13CbRSNrqUwhJzpok8s vlnjg8viL56mPPqBsdeqQID4zvoPH0joyhGwAzZefMcPO9KoBa24cvIKXBmklMtr hNhqy/0SgVef5BdcC1Tm3oFrvr3frwXGL7+N2NlVGuEBjB9Ng/qk9Ob2HQLvssHn aGEijR+FPjC7VM7D1Dor/s0m7zs0ERTrOLW5haMg3FiQEMbSTP7dqWLo4ORkCU43 43YG7ct6rdQVMWCwDT90eZ1OPJzR4DIWgRTSQ/CAxEILl7Y55KDrBHKk5OBKf1ER KveVEryR8X0CXIkVY+oNVMxK6SYAiSTSiYJxj4nyA+p39ALEy6XwR8659kbOKHu8 XY065XM85yxqCMDz9Fh9RaI7qWfxaifRT32IfONkZDA8ggNtYVL7H4bXl1gWAb3a DoshWFqeGEX6hN1Wr4D+rJfdquT8fhCpcODy+78aHNQeJv877416w0gxM6eyzLUN sRSK9NUVRV/MxpSHvI3W =11AI -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --un9Las0PKBj6sqeSpmPXfF2ioAhnsWSeR-- From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Feb 01 08:01:55 2017 Received: (at 25592) by debbugs.gnu.org; 1 Feb 2017 13:01:55 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52917 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cYuXr-0000rC-4S for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 01 Feb 2017 08:01:55 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:42971) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cYuXq-0000r0-1q for 25592@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 01 Feb 2017 08:01:54 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cYuXg-0000bx-3s for 25592@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 01 Feb 2017 08:01:49 -0500 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,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:36688) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cYuXg-0000bs-0u; Wed, 01 Feb 2017 08:01:44 -0500 Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:1618 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1cYuXf-0004Wm-B6; Wed, 01 Feb 2017 08:01:43 -0500 Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2017 15:01:25 +0200 Message-Id: <837f5avzdm.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: =?utf-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9ment?= Pit--Claudel In-reply-to: (message from =?utf-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9ment?= Pit--Claudel on Tue, 31 Jan 2017 15:32:26 -0500) Subject: Re: bug#25592: Feature request: sorting overlays References: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-Spam-Score: -5.0 (-----) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 25592 Cc: 25592@debbugs.gnu.org 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: , Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -5.0 (-----) > From: Clément Pit--Claudel > Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2017 15:32:26 -0500 > > Is there a way to get a list of all overlays in a buffer, sorted by priority? I'm not sure I understand the request. Do you mean that the result of this would be a list of overlays, where the first one is the overlay of the highest priority _anywhere_ in the buffer, the next one of the 2nd highest priority, possibly in an entirely different place in the buffer, and so on -- i.e. completely disregarding the overlay positions? That's a very strange order. Which job(s) need(s) such an order, and why? From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Feb 02 14:41:43 2017 Received: (at 25592) by debbugs.gnu.org; 2 Feb 2017 19:41:43 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54264 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cZNGI-0004i6-TD for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 02 Feb 2017 14:41:43 -0500 Received: from mout.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.134]:57248) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cZNGF-0004hs-B4 for 25592@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 02 Feb 2017 14:41:41 -0500 Received: from [18.26.2.123] ([18.26.2.123]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (mreue002 [212.227.15.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LxXpb-1cNWMq0dgp-017ClB; Thu, 02 Feb 2017 20:41:31 +0100 Subject: Re: bug#25592: Feature request: sorting overlays To: Eli Zaretskii References: <837f5avzdm.fsf@gnu.org> From: =?UTF-8?Q?Cl=c3=a9ment_Pit--Claudel?= Message-ID: <75813a2b-ba63-e356-d766-cd9ae77b28e2@live.com> Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2017 14:41:21 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <837f5avzdm.fsf@gnu.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="KgO3luR2J846cVgolB3W0NV0diafowmfe" X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:EgZ68q6LsG+f18m5/h9uqfsU1dgf6Dpoj86Izm2+TBD9+BSQZbC YDpqyN0AhGD1mLXVIXcS43mlDB/zXnx8QZRstNwb8Y6XzVBgoXeD1L+LCv5hsyeVxyHeUwy yRr4dhn1i6UtQS4HkXPSdi951kEbp5U09ZQJZJnZilI7Dadx/O4Sn+TledpRw6X9Lhq8TNe zXz3U9vAha4pigDE5bx8Q== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:BA/IzzABQPU=:BgCmwBcirTZQ/iaJvCA4JY UZMa6yVhBxcVTh2wkZjCXMBYHgv3vOl1INuvXTsm4PBeFCTfZiLVtiCLy3yYpWeCu2mcIQz4W f+yVupuiDcRL4z5P1cxghToi6Win2/W7hoQQAUWz0++6O7WTD9l2Pl8W1sqQlgTM5VUtYXdQZ 07AkoKJ6rhDsQ/mvXrGnejYbb9F9Ixha+pp6ZXEg8oOMkVMfGSx+6a40ugkA9brTihiN+ArM7 YAciz2hx5ls7yMx80YWNjD0mc/pAWFdxyZX6DRCTpbzQh8UutTfWWvmlbr/1GFK8TbhMK7E4W 0k0Ug45qduax2fXSzdgJNrcCj3MMj2Vi70canUlruDOdjPITV8ComLqtZA/tz36H4bLcQgANo K3BR/Ea1rWqh52avSztFwg0nXh2UraxpS5vr28sF10UmQW1nfBvV0rwh1TFOa6QqbfWFZlVLL bK4r0efcx0UwW09NwMOKabQHcL1qcqnlC7q3bGyuChGo51UzOp3CzFiJ6a6od47rAvU9tJwxS U0b9olSl7FMaUrBnWZDtk+ZtxQ5r96y+PoZ9BzXwi+J4OAHj3Rj0JBEANYX6OXKFSaUyTGa9g QbM2XIdSm6WN4eCcxGX+AyNNnKAPsHb8EhwERKszUv179Erii0MtbwsTlPTBdk9yuFCQJuz0Q Fs21HgY26vX+LV1ol4wye6aNcMMmmIPLMdVMfObqIubZ+VY5x1BUXFgiTUZ9vG5rSKgw= X-Spam-Score: -0.2 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 25592 Cc: 25592@debbugs.gnu.org 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: -0.2 (/) This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --KgO3luR2J846cVgolB3W0NV0diafowmfe Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="ihnP62S2VAm7ItvPkor8rLrNwx3bmlomh"; protected-headers="v1" From: =?UTF-8?Q?Cl=c3=a9ment_Pit--Claudel?= To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: 25592@debbugs.gnu.org Message-ID: <75813a2b-ba63-e356-d766-cd9ae77b28e2@live.com> Subject: Re: bug#25592: Feature request: sorting overlays References: <837f5avzdm.fsf@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: <837f5avzdm.fsf@gnu.org> --ihnP62S2VAm7ItvPkor8rLrNwx3bmlomh Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2017-02-01 08:01, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> From: Cl=C3=A9ment Pit--Claudel >> Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2017 15:32:26 -0500 >> >> Is there a way to get a list of all overlays in a buffer, sorted by pr= iority? >=20 > I'm not sure I understand the request. Do you mean that the result of > this would be a list of overlays, where the first one is the overlay > of the highest priority _anywhere_ in the buffer, the next one of the > 2nd highest priority, possibly in an entirely different place in the > buffer, and so on -- i.e. completely disregarding the overlay > positions?=20 Yup, that's what I mean. > That's a very strange order. Which job(s) need(s) such an > order, and why? I'm writing a function that copies overlay properties to text properties.= I reimplemented compare_overlays in ELisp, but that seems brittle. Cheers, Cl=C3=A9ment. --ihnP62S2VAm7ItvPkor8rLrNwx3bmlomh-- --KgO3luR2J846cVgolB3W0NV0diafowmfe Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJYk4tnAAoJEPqg+cTm90wjmhsP/RpNJLQ62DDR8El66sjVp+mw lUGR8J8GC55g47uswsF0vUTMPmlkU5AY/7Qfw5eYsxLPXyOCi6ELzGo2O1MiPpZy MjgSWrrTk0nixZDGbFT0ZdyVQn39qyYh3gIuO3ZStLJtWJAIXeZ/W3f1JErNGsos /em77VgLx98CvHm/vC1CZVDb02d2e89lCAgTCrGQUzLo1yaxgbgaInIGQ5DARjF+ 0xCQ78M/FZVaTzqAoRteXK2nOwI9OjiZgRDw0zdoo1WXgzgBi3pcIFmfsbg41T2S H88wefAU+HUatYpQ1MZ2Bu9tQzh17KlmUaV5rkWFT5ZeJVN4zWPqkrvtXBZAUfts ZXxjoIbd5ZmLVN466iraTTxmolTFpDthix0gA8BTMberwwC1xDfNpXDTYOjYcKJG uio1tOPYzqgIOlUDuBqUqNxdkEtudcjm3rTonIekhrQVRUY7COj9kDZzapWQrQ9f 7LRu3g3hW/Du64zy37TGDr5pbUrRdE9SuvAwvpeEcxf1TxvGhWSLU04ljlHL5qEx tAj2u1y1okFCOQO3tTS7pr7+sDS3gdFsFHnuQL6mcBw95V6BYCup9n7iQSkRG0Hk pjlWSs4dhEi7KwviuXHGqTY2+ZikHVfXbR5XVIBt9pS3o7AVK0I7OL/uQS9820IO BBejXyJeU4Y/Ib+Oe/+t =aOIE -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --KgO3luR2J846cVgolB3W0NV0diafowmfe-- From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Feb 02 15:43:30 2017 Received: (at 25592) by debbugs.gnu.org; 2 Feb 2017 20:43:30 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54274 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cZOE6-00068Z-0G for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 02 Feb 2017 15:43:30 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:52344) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cZOE4-00068M-Ej for 25592@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 02 Feb 2017 15:43:28 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cZODv-0001O0-S7 for 25592@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 02 Feb 2017 15:43:23 -0500 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,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:37584) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cZODv-0001Nq-Ok; Thu, 02 Feb 2017 15:43:19 -0500 Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:2535 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1cZODu-0000Fr-Al; Thu, 02 Feb 2017 15:43:19 -0500 Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2017 22:43:00 +0200 Message-Id: <83mve4uxwr.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: =?utf-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9ment?= Pit--Claudel In-reply-to: <75813a2b-ba63-e356-d766-cd9ae77b28e2@live.com> (message from =?utf-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9ment?= Pit--Claudel on Thu, 2 Feb 2017 14:41:21 -0500) Subject: Re: bug#25592: Feature request: sorting overlays References: <837f5avzdm.fsf@gnu.org> <75813a2b-ba63-e356-d766-cd9ae77b28e2@live.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-Spam-Score: -5.0 (-----) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 25592 Cc: 25592@debbugs.gnu.org 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: , Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -5.0 (-----) > Cc: 25592@debbugs.gnu.org > From: Clément Pit--Claudel > Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2017 14:41:21 -0500 > > I'm writing a function that copies overlay properties to text properties. That function probably converts overlays by traversing buffer positions from beginning to end, no? Then overlays-at should be what you need, and next-overlay-change is your friend to move to the next "interesting" position when you are done with this one. Isn't that what you are doing? > I reimplemented compare_overlays in ELisp, but that seems brittle. How did you implement in Lisp the "last resort" of comparison, which compares addresses of the C structs? From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Fri Feb 03 10:19:45 2017 Received: (at 25592) by debbugs.gnu.org; 3 Feb 2017 15:19:45 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55295 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cZfeL-0006SI-9R for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 03 Feb 2017 10:19:45 -0500 Received: from mout.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.130]:54459) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cZfeH-0006S2-Lw for 25592@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 03 Feb 2017 10:19:43 -0500 Received: from [18.26.2.123] ([18.26.2.123]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (mreue002 [212.227.15.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MazN4-1cu4sh1fNS-00KMsS; Fri, 03 Feb 2017 16:19:33 +0100 Subject: Re: bug#25592: Feature request: sorting overlays To: Eli Zaretskii References: <837f5avzdm.fsf@gnu.org> <75813a2b-ba63-e356-d766-cd9ae77b28e2@live.com> <83mve4uxwr.fsf@gnu.org> From: =?UTF-8?Q?Cl=c3=a9ment_Pit--Claudel?= Message-ID: Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2017 10:19:15 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <83mve4uxwr.fsf@gnu.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="wKi5Fxw1C5imqMwPXvsejjobuI77Wl8dw" X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:YjNtqE01LX2ej3EH4SbgleCENKtDj8jjN39TWLHnsD+F5CqhxB4 mArY4QJpNNsvtTHmn/m8Z5qyMEaA7zNH5LrQkkfPnmT34H1leZhkzCU/ZU+gUQ3ylxbVjtz gx36gRJuszbvmQy0A5GZOYvD7H49PC9IpsxZYAap0BJIJQTVDbOkNeTNkON8Pp1nGnvakKG SrIvBfJ3apSK9PtRBx3PQ== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:sItPKQC1iGQ=:bNJLhlsICE2fAouwmOWpE8 okNVt9ApoIrAAOSSDtZ4GxekZSpbBpj+rJXN52iwIkre3Mg3sRvASbNVlguD4A3Mmq/VGPLwC Fpr2onTIfQq1XMfbkWwwT7wftWX7+GO/mFv1Zxtmc6lISj16Rtvub+uZ+CKIBjbGBcbhN+XHp TxUM2X/VFRXinj/1N7qMR+AsB49xbTufar9brgbhyYYMngcSqdQRqypZeCTlGVOeaLeuUV+1U /cb2m8zVIGjbkkGUU2CBnc8kqsbWHDNxoeri9gaiKvjX135p2kTF2L3cVW8oikqlx6wTz9Sz1 IOmD1ep8rWYmFUHrcIJsExbVXSIMNOBOLq5zSbEUym/Q3Aun0SMhTWR2iD12Bsdho6180aU4v TtDWl7HIZqcN2jsyuOFCUEVn/p+u4O+OrR/7p84fruHcMoFIJvs3/PFFTeh5oiIII+A5mhAOD dsWoasFa4M43+53oQkG71urIUXzKTuFfkjLqgC2zGSTMSulZ8W+tQPm71T+4HDo0I0EDoCizI yQS2XHoS6lLHzey2gAIyfFwMLNyKhePeG/T/0TD6CW2Ejqo8OhLDxUqf6S16rXDYROUctpEDS QQQC/3JEskJ4jyFoaecaEcjf/HAwrQtgXEwYllDK68l9ZYg/7BNgGLG7UOq10XcI7sniG7RCY 75tGsaLBlyKrrpDAF1VSvz0jw75OFJGI1rgrkLvqZS84mxwj2BnTxWxJyaLJNv0I46lI= X-Spam-Score: -0.2 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 25592 Cc: 25592@debbugs.gnu.org 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: -0.2 (/) This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --wKi5Fxw1C5imqMwPXvsejjobuI77Wl8dw Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="0ihfAwRAXB8D0IOLuCTR5W2I0FWNUh0PJ"; protected-headers="v1" From: =?UTF-8?Q?Cl=c3=a9ment_Pit--Claudel?= To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: 25592@debbugs.gnu.org Message-ID: Subject: Re: bug#25592: Feature request: sorting overlays References: <837f5avzdm.fsf@gnu.org> <75813a2b-ba63-e356-d766-cd9ae77b28e2@live.com> <83mve4uxwr.fsf@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: <83mve4uxwr.fsf@gnu.org> --0ihfAwRAXB8D0IOLuCTR5W2I0FWNUh0PJ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2017-02-02 15:43, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> Cc: 25592@debbugs.gnu.org >> From: Cl=C3=A9ment Pit--Claudel >> Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2017 14:41:21 -0500 >> >> I'm writing a function that copies overlay properties to text properti= es. >=20 > That function probably converts overlays by traversing buffer > positions from beginning to end, no? Then overlays-at should be what > you need, and next-overlay-change is your friend to move to the next > "interesting" position when you are done with this one. >=20 > Isn't that what you are doing? No: I'm iterating over all overlays, and applying them one by one. >> I reimplemented compare_overlays in ELisp, but that seems brittle. >=20 > How did you implement in Lisp the "last resort" of comparison, which > compares addresses of the C structs? I didn't :) --0ihfAwRAXB8D0IOLuCTR5W2I0FWNUh0PJ-- --wKi5Fxw1C5imqMwPXvsejjobuI77Wl8dw Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJYlJ9zAAoJEPqg+cTm90wj4ioP/i61YyPLod6m7Du1WCRyW4Ex 3Mdc0d3/HtdR4RMAw5icsplE9HmamPWjI6MSzd0VVBSv7EqKu94Wd29j7coemreQ xFP5rvfjCVFPtE3P/DgcYQNwogumxhIem6cNsN4I8tiw+Kd/s/xhvYTozrAVduJ/ fKvZmxBhwFFiX23p2Nmaf2aVz7K5h4N/1l/g3UMqpV4ir0D/87tDadjN2A3hz8Ve XPMJn6ycyemD5dVA110OPkci44dsuuWENQV7cS8cNwwT3ta240rx/jT7NNemqryI AaGrkDz3O7RWN6BKl+Cw10UEp53daqNfkLcCNr8MKhA1eJO24Fr4EfQ1SR6PzR5K 70VFaxovA4DnUD9cUiJ6RN2Lv97yqSqT8IdEkZA0AtKllKjWz6+REYPDI9ruONrp XmcbjElU9gbHTr9Y+Dobr1gv1w7z5VPmBlnrat6QgsvaOUGJLKUCHXQ3LqbmzeA8 9X9v8lBXplMnkzwHUoCbcA5nYgoIge8X9dN2bYoikpzV5Ju+uVZJetYc6T6hbGX9 waJG5gnRQkKA/7CdqMvXwS5TjN/jDvSHe3bEFp1kGwc9/Afj9/1tUPp8J4N93Wcy ckfgca3zyRmZPTvwCX9CzPGAkYQrWqkFUiv8tlwrX8CIWM0RwgIDlJ+y1vbHCsqD r4vV/dAE+8QBabDoeasK =ILV1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --wKi5Fxw1C5imqMwPXvsejjobuI77Wl8dw-- From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Fri Feb 03 16:18:23 2017 Received: (at 25592) by debbugs.gnu.org; 3 Feb 2017 21:18:23 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55402 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cZlFP-0002oS-J6 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 03 Feb 2017 16:18:23 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:39468) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cZlFO-0002oG-1d for 25592@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 03 Feb 2017 16:18:22 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cZlFE-0006Vz-Fy for 25592@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 03 Feb 2017 16:18:17 -0500 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,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:37402) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cZlFE-0006Vv-CT; Fri, 03 Feb 2017 16:18:12 -0500 Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:4247 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1cZlFD-0004IT-Gr; Fri, 03 Feb 2017 16:18:12 -0500 Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2017 23:17:58 +0200 Message-Id: <83tw8bt1mh.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: =?utf-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9ment?= Pit--Claudel In-reply-to: (message from =?utf-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9ment?= Pit--Claudel on Fri, 3 Feb 2017 10:19:15 -0500) Subject: Re: bug#25592: Feature request: sorting overlays References: <837f5avzdm.fsf@gnu.org> <75813a2b-ba63-e356-d766-cd9ae77b28e2@live.com> <83mve4uxwr.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-Spam-Score: -5.0 (-----) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 25592 Cc: 25592@debbugs.gnu.org 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: , Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -5.0 (-----) > Cc: 25592@debbugs.gnu.org > From: Clément Pit--Claudel > Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2017 10:19:15 -0500 > > >> I'm writing a function that copies overlay properties to text properties. > > > > That function probably converts overlays by traversing buffer > > positions from beginning to end, no? Then overlays-at should be what > > you need, and next-overlay-change is your friend to move to the next > > "interesting" position when you are done with this one. > > > > Isn't that what you are doing? > > No: I'm iterating over all overlays, and applying them one by one. Why not do it as I suggest? Then your problems with sorting will be solved as a nice side-effect. > >> I reimplemented compare_overlays in ELisp, but that seems brittle. > > > > How did you implement in Lisp the "last resort" of comparison, which > > compares addresses of the C structs? > > I didn't :) So it isn't really a solution ;-) From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Fri Feb 03 16:51:44 2017 Received: (at 25592) by debbugs.gnu.org; 3 Feb 2017 21:51:44 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55410 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cZllg-0003aW-CS for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 03 Feb 2017 16:51:44 -0500 Received: from mout.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.134]:49517) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cZlld-0003aH-L1 for 25592@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 03 Feb 2017 16:51:42 -0500 Received: from [18.26.2.123] ([18.26.2.123]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (mreue003 [212.227.15.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0Ld1ZU-1c9CRK0AEK-00i969; Fri, 03 Feb 2017 22:51:34 +0100 Subject: Re: bug#25592: Feature request: sorting overlays To: Eli Zaretskii References: <837f5avzdm.fsf@gnu.org> <75813a2b-ba63-e356-d766-cd9ae77b28e2@live.com> <83mve4uxwr.fsf@gnu.org> <83tw8bt1mh.fsf@gnu.org> From: =?UTF-8?Q?Cl=c3=a9ment_Pit--Claudel?= Message-ID: <1d90ade3-b0a4-f07a-d424-b052a68fd4a7@live.com> Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2017 16:51:24 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <83tw8bt1mh.fsf@gnu.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="Ej48am4KTvrb9dSu9jdwFotw27dtt00w1" X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:dcuFIWKxvA4ApfehYZaAtSJRpv8vCAGW6Ag5K57JT3mb5ELS3zL p9VhIZdiEzMj0X13S2bMHP9JQwFlHM0th2Y5prQq51fwXdPFe7dd74BPeaKMzv+2il/R5+v v0KMsUePD5x2XzZ1o4HwOgJvnh6lBN0CklQwBhWUBrMdl3BSOnsYhfnB2LnwMRgAhjA2C0W dy0Po4CK7PV8zdtZ5aeWg== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:LwNMrbnKUeg=:PjK/rl80i2G4PRZwHQUiwq s4FqJ8j5PVlRDJAxv8jVRD4nqXVXyqU8veQaLHWasvkP6skfZvhSA5WzTfO6Wd+ckI+2LnDlJ W5njVxv/Yj2NsH8zrJSmveaAJ7uJ3oTWL3YyvXKXvO2DvtkiuwTmwrQaenX6zyIv/j448YMNt wn7vd9jz10Lyrhp+X0OTeX/BLQixAwhzIMPc/XP5EgNF/x+ruRdj4qpp/VjwHEI9np7/HgZ7m VZuXII9Si0qMrxC1KcvIuPBE2uPfnUMjj/kzSpcXMdvPmqJOp+4Qjk0Y8XZFUIAorK3pdBcRJ eFrfuPpzK4WFHhHXgT7d4eYr+hUnf+EeZ0tHNJ4wSfswvhBLCY5BMDgKjjtRFmqd+CCwU7MpV 0ChCFLPbelhEHD3ed/0yDB60GpxLoOMKcP+sBNzAWa0ysSP1+5KvhsX9yTKASKNM+YWeHuCY8 F1sdzdpwuD5A3Pn5q85nLrBs1ZOgCsAn6xqnVDCz6xPLXEQaQiYdHzr7s1GnwqH/zyhRxJZ/L d7GwRIrLrmxRdeIpEQ2UJXvTpOUwzzgHCEB9ngC7uYh3RgUgzqDAew9/Z/YHI+rck3R1h4BLU I4L4pK+50rHW6I79jSPN6NVvmLBl5lyUZg1EYFCKDx+3TUzhQVqIdAGZ7Ax52p0Apj1rQKa6L ytRZARfOtnoeQ0waoRCuoXbeAsGNR/kghE7RYyuxV0ndcFub3Ujl3D2gYbUaSSk6R9Q8= X-Spam-Score: -0.2 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 25592 Cc: 25592@debbugs.gnu.org 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: -0.2 (/) This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --Ej48am4KTvrb9dSu9jdwFotw27dtt00w1 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="4lAd3oOVSBEuPiEFS4QgDg7Lo2i04FeRX"; protected-headers="v1" From: =?UTF-8?Q?Cl=c3=a9ment_Pit--Claudel?= To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: 25592@debbugs.gnu.org Message-ID: <1d90ade3-b0a4-f07a-d424-b052a68fd4a7@live.com> Subject: Re: bug#25592: Feature request: sorting overlays References: <837f5avzdm.fsf@gnu.org> <75813a2b-ba63-e356-d766-cd9ae77b28e2@live.com> <83mve4uxwr.fsf@gnu.org> <83tw8bt1mh.fsf@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: <83tw8bt1mh.fsf@gnu.org> --4lAd3oOVSBEuPiEFS4QgDg7Lo2i04FeRX Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2017-02-03 16:17, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> Cc: 25592@debbugs.gnu.org >> From: Cl=C3=A9ment Pit--Claudel >> Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2017 10:19:15 -0500 >> >>>> I'm writing a function that copies overlay properties to text proper= ties. >>> >>> That function probably converts overlays by traversing buffer >>> positions from beginning to end, no? Then overlays-at should be what= >>> you need, and next-overlay-change is your friend to move to the next >>> "interesting" position when you are done with this one. >>> >>> Isn't that what you are doing? >> >> No: I'm iterating over all overlays, and applying them one by one. >=20 > Why not do it as I suggest? Then your problems with sorting will be > solved as a nice side-effect. I'm worried about the cost and the additional implementation complexity. = My current algorithm is very simple: iterate over overlays, applying the= ir properties to the ranges they cover. In contrast, scanning over overl= ays introduces additional complexity (I need to keep track of which overl= ays I have already applied and move around the buffer), and additional co= sts (next-overlay-change seems to do quite a bit of work). None of this is a show stopper (in fact, I don't even know for sure that = the slowdown would be significant, and I do know that I don't expect to h= ave that many overlays anyway :), but it'd be nice to be able to use the = "simpler" solution. >>>> I reimplemented compare_overlays in ELisp, but that seems brittle. >>> >>> How did you implement in Lisp the "last resort" of comparison, which >>> compares addresses of the C structs? >> >> I didn't :) >=20 > So it isn't really a solution ;-) It's not a full reimplementation, but it's enough of a solution for me :)= The docs say =E2=80=9CIf SORTED is non-=E2=80=98nil=E2=80=99, the list i= s in decreasing order of priority=E2=80=9D, and that's what my implementa= tion does. Cheers, Cl=C3=A9ment. --4lAd3oOVSBEuPiEFS4QgDg7Lo2i04FeRX-- --Ej48am4KTvrb9dSu9jdwFotw27dtt00w1 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJYlPtcAAoJEPqg+cTm90wjfqgQAKEhZerHukBX4IA3iYhpfKKb 82fUoBdmpRMK6B3S6FFDOhGJwYXfG0fjKM8rMr0ZNNuWG0aq7wAIx6xULgAQ4s5p c4rNAZit0e9Rze0M4oR1I4t+Y04l5zwoIMTc059bj5jyJiwRYTpcV4smhJidRg60 H3E6M3Mc0iKdt4kVassgpL1drt8Liu7q6XDARS2dWz1aRd49B9zxJvBGCECLTvKy tA9mmaVHiVKWedaLIrQlP+M0bOTBVPYU+4rBX0HS1WD3SGJizaG4V2Vvc1iqQ6Wp VpbnqltFOdi+NDOmwefD4lwUGdoKb0yL2+bOUjqzBihZGeBAihRNEftKyJrD1A++ 0o7Tz7QRiaNivMr9u22pHMqAPE85YrzFyA+SUfutzveYLXj2lw90l4933u5IqbG3 aLXtm4ASclSETyQVEDoGjSDlW0NsZr2D/la1vATIucZJmjvpmNl/WcheJZ+WzwD9 /q7xK0DtTyt+I+P1ne7Que1zcWQv+C3rqarOMtUJ8NVQPOfp+jsnyvHWxr/8/WPt iH6MMXWZgw5Eu0M8HnQWNYweT0ptvVNS3MH9fdaTW/MeQ8fDbZ0wPBvGIGYmfpMj 7VprtmeKuVDI4GtcHgHvQws1oQTFJHr65VCMvYPzTuCbnR9bAjGclmFWJVbG4AQD caNQecJNAj4owmzaMvzN =S1vS -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Ej48am4KTvrb9dSu9jdwFotw27dtt00w1-- From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Fri Feb 03 18:28:33 2017 Received: (at 25592) by debbugs.gnu.org; 3 Feb 2017 23:28:33 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55421 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cZnHM-0005gV-Vu for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 03 Feb 2017 18:28:33 -0500 Received: from smtprelay-h21.telenor.se ([195.54.99.196]:58974) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cZnHK-0005gH-NW for 25592@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 03 Feb 2017 18:28:31 -0500 Received: from ipb4.telenor.se (ipb4.telenor.se [195.54.127.167]) by smtprelay-h21.telenor.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78179C02A for <25592@debbugs.gnu.org>; Sat, 4 Feb 2017 00:28:20 +0100 (CET) X-SMTPAUTH-B2: [bocjoh] X-SENDER-IP: [85.229.6.57] X-LISTENER: [smtp.bredband.net] X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A2B7CwAkEZVYEDkG5VVdGgEBAQECAQEBAQgBAQEBg1OBWRGHA4dPkRqXSIYiAoJfRBQBAgEBAQEBAQEGAQEBAQEBAQE4RIRqAQQBViMFCwshJQ8BBBgNChoTiWkMAQGxL4tBAQEBAQEFAQEBASSLOoEkiQ4Fm2OTawGPHpMKNiCBHBsiCIR/HYFiPzWJIQEBAQ X-IPAS-Result: A2B7CwAkEZVYEDkG5VVdGgEBAQECAQEBAQgBAQEBg1OBWRGHA4dPkRqXSIYiAoJfRBQBAgEBAQEBAQEGAQEBAQEBAQE4RIRqAQQBViMFCwshJQ8BBBgNChoTiWkMAQGxL4tBAQEBAQEFAQEBASSLOoEkiQ4Fm2OTawGPHpMKNiCBHBsiCIR/HYFiPzWJIQEBAQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.33,331,1477954800"; d="scan'208";a="660942156" Received: from c-3906e555.04-211-6c6b701.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se (HELO muon.localdomain) ([85.229.6.57]) by ipb4.telenor.se with ESMTP; 04 Feb 2017 00:28:22 +0100 Received: by muon.localdomain (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 55D164841FB; Sat, 4 Feb 2017 00:28:19 +0100 (CET) From: =?utf-8?Q?Johan_Bockg=C3=A5rd?= To: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: bug#25592: Feature request: sorting overlays References: <837f5avzdm.fsf@gnu.org> <75813a2b-ba63-e356-d766-cd9ae77b28e2@live.com> <83mve4uxwr.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Sat, 04 Feb 2017 00:28:19 +0100 In-Reply-To: <83mve4uxwr.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Thu, 02 Feb 2017 22:43:00 +0200") Message-ID: <874m0ag8h8.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 25592 Cc: =?utf-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9ment?= Pit--Claudel , 25592@debbugs.gnu.org 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: 0.3 (/) Eli Zaretskii writes: > How did you implement in Lisp the "last resort" of comparison, which > compares addresses of the C structs? Use sxhash? From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sat Feb 04 03:13:30 2017 Received: (at 25592) by debbugs.gnu.org; 4 Feb 2017 08:13:30 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55481 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cZvTO-0003uH-3J for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 04 Feb 2017 03:13:30 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:60488) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cZvTN-0003u6-14 for 25592@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 04 Feb 2017 03:13:29 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cZvTD-0005ox-Nf for 25592@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 04 Feb 2017 03:13:23 -0500 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,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:46071) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cZvTD-0005ol-KA; Sat, 04 Feb 2017 03:13:19 -0500 Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:4584 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1cZvTC-0007rh-0D; Sat, 04 Feb 2017 03:13:18 -0500 Date: Sat, 04 Feb 2017 10:13:08 +0200 Message-Id: <83r33etluz.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: =?utf-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9ment?= Pit--Claudel In-reply-to: <1d90ade3-b0a4-f07a-d424-b052a68fd4a7@live.com> (message from =?utf-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9ment?= Pit--Claudel on Fri, 3 Feb 2017 16:51:24 -0500) Subject: Re: bug#25592: Feature request: sorting overlays References: <837f5avzdm.fsf@gnu.org> <75813a2b-ba63-e356-d766-cd9ae77b28e2@live.com> <83mve4uxwr.fsf@gnu.org> <83tw8bt1mh.fsf@gnu.org> <1d90ade3-b0a4-f07a-d424-b052a68fd4a7@live.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-Spam-Score: -5.0 (-----) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 25592 Cc: 25592@debbugs.gnu.org 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: , Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -5.0 (-----) > Cc: 25592@debbugs.gnu.org > From: Clément Pit--Claudel > Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2017 16:51:24 -0500 > > >> No: I'm iterating over all overlays, and applying them one by one. > > > > Why not do it as I suggest? Then your problems with sorting will be > > solved as a nice side-effect. > > I'm worried about the cost and the additional implementation complexity. My current algorithm is very simple: iterate over overlays, applying their properties to the ranges they cover. In contrast, scanning over overlays introduces additional complexity (I need to keep track of which overlays I have already applied and move around the buffer), and additional costs (next-overlay-change seems to do quite a bit of work). Why would you need to keep track of overlays, if you always process each one just once? As for costs, next-overlay-change (or one of its variants) is used by the display engine in its inner loops (see compute_display_string_pos), so it should be fast enough for your needs, I think. > None of this is a show stopper (in fact, I don't even know for sure that the slowdown would be significant, and I do know that I don't expect to have that many overlays anyway :), but it'd be nice to be able to use the "simpler" solution. But the "simpler" solution has a problem, whereby the order of the overlays might depend on buffer position for which you evaluate the order, because overlays could begin at the same position, but end at different ones, or vice versa. IOW, the overlaps between portions of the buffer text "covered" by different overlays could be partial. How do you handle this situation in your algorithm? The correct solution would require having different values of the corresponding text property for different locations, according to the highest-priority overlay at each location. Am I missing something? > >>> How did you implement in Lisp the "last resort" of comparison, which > >>> compares addresses of the C structs? > >> > >> I didn't :) > > > > So it isn't really a solution ;-) > > It's not a full reimplementation, but it's enough of a solution for me :) The docs say “If SORTED is non-‘nil’, the list is in decreasing order of priority”, and that's what my implementation does. Then there will be use cases where your solution will give a wrong value to the text property that replaces the overlays. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sat Feb 04 03:29:48 2017 Received: (at 25592) by debbugs.gnu.org; 4 Feb 2017 08:29:48 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55485 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cZvjA-0004Gd-Ju for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 04 Feb 2017 03:29:48 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:34196) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cZvj8-0004GQ-Sb for 25592@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 04 Feb 2017 03:29:47 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cZvj0-00036t-C6 for 25592@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 04 Feb 2017 03:29:41 -0500 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,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:46444) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cZvj0-00036i-8z; Sat, 04 Feb 2017 03:29:38 -0500 Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:4789 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1cZvix-0001Oh-9r; Sat, 04 Feb 2017 03:29:37 -0500 Date: Sat, 04 Feb 2017 10:29:26 +0200 Message-Id: <83o9yitl3t.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: Johan =?iso-8859-1?Q?Bockg=E5rd?= In-reply-to: <874m0ag8h8.fsf@gnu.org> (message from Johan =?iso-8859-1?Q?B?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?ockg=E5rd?= on Sat, 04 Feb 2017 00:28:19 +0100) Subject: Re: bug#25592: Feature request: sorting overlays References: <837f5avzdm.fsf@gnu.org> <75813a2b-ba63-e356-d766-cd9ae77b28e2@live.com> <83mve4uxwr.fsf@gnu.org> <874m0ag8h8.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-Spam-Score: -5.0 (-----) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 25592 Cc: clement.pitclaudel@live.com, 25592@debbugs.gnu.org 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: , Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -5.0 (-----) > From: Johan Bockgrd > Cc: Clment Pit--Claudel , > 25592@debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Sat, 04 Feb 2017 00:28:19 +0100 > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > > How did you implement in Lisp the "last resort" of comparison, which > > compares addresses of the C structs? > > Use sxhash? Doesn't that return an unsigned value? sort_overlays compares the addresses as signed values. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Feb 05 11:21:22 2017 Received: (at 25592) by debbugs.gnu.org; 5 Feb 2017 16:21:22 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56823 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1caPZ4-0005cY-AT for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 05 Feb 2017 11:21:22 -0500 Received: from mout.kundenserver.de ([217.72.192.75]:50241) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1caPZ1-0005cK-NC for 25592@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 05 Feb 2017 11:21:20 -0500 Received: from [192.168.1.106] ([67.186.135.89]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (mreue104 [212.227.15.184]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MeSpb-1cnobn279b-00QCoW; Sun, 05 Feb 2017 17:21:12 +0100 Subject: Re: bug#25592: Feature request: sorting overlays To: Eli Zaretskii References: <837f5avzdm.fsf@gnu.org> <75813a2b-ba63-e356-d766-cd9ae77b28e2@live.com> <83mve4uxwr.fsf@gnu.org> <83tw8bt1mh.fsf@gnu.org> <1d90ade3-b0a4-f07a-d424-b052a68fd4a7@live.com> <83r33etluz.fsf@gnu.org> From: =?UTF-8?Q?Cl=c3=a9ment_Pit--Claudel?= Message-ID: <21abc5a1-0777-cd33-ff26-2cd0853e9161@live.com> Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2017 11:21:04 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <83r33etluz.fsf@gnu.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="2VSvoVAEKVCdNQhuKbD5Tr0jUiHPdaR8k" X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:1xOlHnp58NVsq9aYc43SPMj7rHV5BJT0oXvhGCWqIc0SyM6Ft3h vHHZdmCXNWbquSJXBhlfC0tqVXPAxSMn46dzz9Wpv71SbA+c+zeqzLJ29resmJB/2xIzmOR CRm8x85oqH5FtqNFMW+7SDnj+MrcYqBl5XAfiN6qVEKL2p2o5neYRPJev8zUaTFNpYKC8Lj aHesO8/gl+2b/cwH0jcKw== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:vLsTV3g8P9c=:7VlvvFVdRUyrTxshq62mpq MNfDLCfD3S080FIrA899mvJdJHkVpxKq7DSfjsEDBJiXHhp58dTX3yqV5IbNRTV4GCC2bJmGf BW9ReaaPzDTHm311p5lRHANBKD6lVo2JaUvq1TxppKqFx+l17GJkCF9+BMiGH+/lUN42Cnb63 DPNcic/dgzUmehzrY3KVUlca3MYrMRC+u5u6wZdGdlSvhSmt4chog7YxmS9O/ballCW1Su+kk GCFxry5PZOuBmm7EFgzPy5qKU9OyBQcjrEZKsX/LOu4VJrYufZtUGkOQrQrSdFg9W1Pglxsgg hU9ypdXOTaDr5hlaP4naIPlKA+V9k4AfEv9ouNuyBm3RLBq/zG1rVY0kwdImUtsNgB/DsKMfY znle84A17ccCM3kiCCMK5Oo2y0C2V8GcGq2uXJ7wV29mrNtvVYpnBhjaTK1ZWxCv4a6QTwiT8 MVvBfKwDWiYvWMdg2GovAU4lOwinKMOPW5r4/348YWpkP/pRh546G2H+BP3miuFS53i2h8GGK e09TtYu7w1DyqYHA8T/NvCf24wg3sChdINi4VfTD+moCIiM59RsUhpYkfrLp/z5alf7ai0hXe WWrVrXR0EVPI8qcjqtCeVtI1EfU+n4Az6vTSSS2iOL9V0rhnJaFJQnFzxUrb5LcVClVFdGe2l CPTnbXDc2VbHO9d9OXA7Kb5lbMQ8zhqawiCLBSUG5Ar9ugOkyEfcfy4HnlM+lwzM/SfE= X-Spam-Score: -0.9 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 25592 Cc: 25592@debbugs.gnu.org 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: -0.9 (/) This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --2VSvoVAEKVCdNQhuKbD5Tr0jUiHPdaR8k Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="MwFqiPdsEx02Gqx62LXQnbx9RUVnQ8KOC"; protected-headers="v1" From: =?UTF-8?Q?Cl=c3=a9ment_Pit--Claudel?= To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: 25592@debbugs.gnu.org Message-ID: <21abc5a1-0777-cd33-ff26-2cd0853e9161@live.com> Subject: Re: bug#25592: Feature request: sorting overlays References: <837f5avzdm.fsf@gnu.org> <75813a2b-ba63-e356-d766-cd9ae77b28e2@live.com> <83mve4uxwr.fsf@gnu.org> <83tw8bt1mh.fsf@gnu.org> <1d90ade3-b0a4-f07a-d424-b052a68fd4a7@live.com> <83r33etluz.fsf@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: <83r33etluz.fsf@gnu.org> --MwFqiPdsEx02Gqx62LXQnbx9RUVnQ8KOC Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2017-02-04 03:13, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> Cc: 25592@debbugs.gnu.org From: Cl=C3=A9ment Pit--Claudel >> Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2017 16:51:24 -0500 >>=20 >>>> No: I'm iterating over all overlays, and applying them one by >>>> one. >>>=20 >>> Why not do it as I suggest? Then your problems with sorting will >>> be solved as a nice side-effect. >>=20 >> I'm worried about the cost and the additional implementation >> complexity. My current algorithm is very simple: iterate over >> overlays, applying their properties to the ranges they cover. In >> contrast, scanning over overlays introduces additional complexity >> (I need to keep track of which overlays I have already applied and >> move around the buffer), and additional costs (next-overlay-change >> seems to do quite a bit of work). >=20 > Why would you need to keep track of overlays, if you always process=20 > each one just once? To avoid applying the same overlay twice. But I think I understand your s= uggestion better now, and you meant that I would apply each overlay's pro= perties not to the entire overlay's range (overlay-start .. overlay-end),= but instead just to the current range (as determined by next-overlay-cha= nge). Correct? =20 > As for costs, next-overlay-change (or one of its variants) is used > by the display engine in its inner loops (see=20 > compute_display_string_pos), so it should be fast enough for your=20 > needs, I think. I see, thanks. I'll consider this option, then! >> None of this is a show stopper (in fact, I don't even know for sure >> that the slowdown would be significant, and I do know that I don't >> expect to have that many overlays anyway :), but it'd be nice to be >> able to use the "simpler" solution. >=20 > But the "simpler" solution has a problem, whereby the order of the=20 > overlays might depend on buffer position for which you evaluate the=20 > order, because overlays could begin at the same position, but end at=20 > different ones, or vice versa. IOW, the overlaps between portions > of the buffer text "covered" by different overlays could be partial. > How do you handle this situation in your algorithm? The correct > solution would require having different values of the corresponding > text property for different locations, according to the > highest-priority overlay at each location. Am I missing something? I think I'm probably the one missing something :) I'm not sure I understa= nd the problem. Here's my current algorithm: (defun esh--filter-plist (plist props) "Remove PROPS from PLIST." (let ((filtered nil)) (esh--doplist (prop val plist) (unless (memq prop props) (push prop filtered) (push val filtered))) (nreverse filtered))) (defun esh--number-or-0 (x) "Return X if X is a number, 0 otherwise." (if (numberp x) x 0)) (defun esh--augment-overlay (ov) "Return a list of three values: the priorities of overlay OV, and OV." (let ((pr (overlay-get ov 'priority))) (if (consp pr) (list (esh--number-or-0 (car pr)) (esh--number-or-0 (cdr pr)) ov)= (list (esh--number-or-0 pr) 0 ov)))) (defun esh--augmented-overlay-< (ov1 ov2) "Compare two lists OV1 OV2 produced by `esh--augment-overlay'." (or (< (car ov1) (car ov2)) (and (=3D (car ov1) (car ov2)) (< (cadr ov1) (cadr ov2))))) (defun esh--buffer-overlays (buf) "Collects overlays of BUF, in order of increasing priority." (let* ((ovs (with-current-buffer buf (overlays-in (point-min) (point-ma= x)))) (augmented (mapcar #'esh--augment-overlay ovs)) (sorted (sort augmented #'esh--augmented-overlay-<))) (mapcar #'cl-caddr sorted))) (defconst esh--overlay-specific-props '(after-string before-string evaporate isearch-open-invisible isearch-open-invisible-temporary priority window) "Properties that only apply to overlays.") (defun esh--commit-overlays (buf) "Copy overlays of BUF into current buffer's text properties." (let ((pt-min-diff (- (with-current-buffer buf (point-min)) (point-min)= ))) (dolist (ov (esh--buffer-overlays buf)) (let* ((start (max (point-min) (- (overlay-start ov) pt-min-diff)))= (end (min (point-max) (- (overlay-end ov) pt-min-diff))) (ov-props (overlay-properties ov)) (cat-props (let ((symbol (plist-get ov-props 'category))) (and symbol (symbol-plist symbol)))) (face (let ((mem (plist-member ov-props 'face))) (if mem (cadr mem) (plist-get cat-props 'face)))) (props (esh--filter-plist (append cat-props ov-props) (cons 'face esh--overlay-specific-pro= ps)))) (when face (font-lock-prepend-text-property start end 'face face)) (add-text-properties start end props))))) I can trim the code to remove bits that are not directly relevant, if you= want. >>>>> How did you implement in Lisp the "last resort" of >>>>> comparison, which compares addresses of the C structs? >>>>=20 >>>> I didn't :) >>>=20 >>> So it isn't really a solution ;-) >>=20 >> It's not a full reimplementation, but it's enough of a solution for >> me :) The docs say =E2=80=9CIf SORTED is non-=E2=80=98nil=E2=80=99, th= e list is in >> decreasing order of priority=E2=80=9D, and that's what my implementati= on >> does. >=20 > Then there will be use cases where your solution will give a wrong=20 > value to the text property that replaces the overlays. Snap. Do you have a concrete example? I imagine this would happen if tw= o overlays are added to the same range of text, with no explicit priority= ? Thanks for your comments! Cl=C3=A9ment. --MwFqiPdsEx02Gqx62LXQnbx9RUVnQ8KOC-- --2VSvoVAEKVCdNQhuKbD5Tr0jUiHPdaR8k Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJYl1D1AAoJEPqg+cTm90wjnhEQAJzyuZNVMo8ySoOrXI7OTXno MyzqiOTP6KVYJHzeJG5tM5H2BpsdWfYfsRkScUfptUWAU97p2tv2mGnRT0T40c6f PQgbmOaJ7Fd3m+B/G5DUGY4bNjE6FrcG+3LcpqnP1dkp1KpnP8pBPT+5dui7iwge NRSR4O4jSg1EqKccFLn8ykvDAhT3LJ10eHrPJKGQh/VF44wPkoHeFqS9Nir6bbjN xB8Fyx2xn4KIpTCnPi7BI/SvId+Nq6g/D1A2FODoIPfT5bchVBDghwVBqTEUVd67 sO3LHoziLCLJtJizXNsuSlLJQUAv72edktsDtmOtnr6JKT2MLyrgdpA7EZJh9O/W hsGHrh67n5A3bgW9TgUV93GgsJTI/jWYmTuLvWRWR/Ewy32g2y3E5sl6NtOJekM3 rCFj5S2M6ePrdwbtxJovODhqGDRw803a+2V0ZnJY4hpoDmWOpwwyxfKeOzs0wv2t ztivTpimNuFvWIbtFX4HG19YG91wQqNhKfhL3Epk9UHNccBOF7bd7a/hDCQNfWuE QJopWIysNubE6A53d2oY2ZIvNBwxJAZ2vSJWCH40C+rp1BtAXL5yw5UyelLC0xUW vfDVwXgEjEDqd5vbikIZ1B3rqEXnN5fVQ66Q7h0WCqdHUcOmK7OFTLPaDNyT8V6g jzsp7Wf8D9EnVeIPT+uT =yMkS -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --2VSvoVAEKVCdNQhuKbD5Tr0jUiHPdaR8k-- From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Feb 05 13:29:14 2017 Received: (at 25592) by debbugs.gnu.org; 5 Feb 2017 18:29:14 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56854 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1caRYo-0008VS-FZ for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 05 Feb 2017 13:29:14 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:33846) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1caRYm-0008VF-Je for 25592@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 05 Feb 2017 13:29:12 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1caRYc-000382-SN for 25592@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 05 Feb 2017 13:29:07 -0500 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,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:37793) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1caRYc-00037x-Pp; Sun, 05 Feb 2017 13:29:02 -0500 Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:3753 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1caRYb-0007r3-JA; Sun, 05 Feb 2017 13:29:02 -0500 Date: Sun, 05 Feb 2017 20:28:53 +0200 Message-Id: <83wpd47aqi.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: =?utf-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9ment?= Pit--Claudel In-reply-to: <21abc5a1-0777-cd33-ff26-2cd0853e9161@live.com> (message from =?utf-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9ment?= Pit--Claudel on Sun, 5 Feb 2017 11:21:04 -0500) Subject: Re: bug#25592: Feature request: sorting overlays References: <837f5avzdm.fsf@gnu.org> <75813a2b-ba63-e356-d766-cd9ae77b28e2@live.com> <83mve4uxwr.fsf@gnu.org> <83tw8bt1mh.fsf@gnu.org> <1d90ade3-b0a4-f07a-d424-b052a68fd4a7@live.com> <83r33etluz.fsf@gnu.org> <21abc5a1-0777-cd33-ff26-2cd0853e9161@live.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-Spam-Score: -5.0 (-----) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 25592 Cc: 25592@debbugs.gnu.org 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: , Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -5.0 (-----) > Cc: 25592@debbugs.gnu.org > From: Clément Pit--Claudel > Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2017 11:21:04 -0500 > > > Why would you need to keep track of overlays, if you always process > > each one just once? > > To avoid applying the same overlay twice. But I think I understand your suggestion better now, and you meant that I would apply each overlay's properties not to the entire overlay's range (overlay-start .. overlay-end), but instead just to the current range (as determined by next-overlay-change). Correct? Yes, of course. That's how the display engine handles overlays. > > But the "simpler" solution has a problem, whereby the order of the > > overlays might depend on buffer position for which you evaluate the > > order, because overlays could begin at the same position, but end at > > different ones, or vice versa. IOW, the overlaps between portions > > of the buffer text "covered" by different overlays could be partial. > > How do you handle this situation in your algorithm? The correct > > solution would require having different values of the corresponding > > text property for different locations, according to the > > highest-priority overlay at each location. Am I missing something? > > I think I'm probably the one missing something :) I'm not sure I understand the problem. Here's my current algorithm: > [...] > (defun esh--commit-overlays (buf) > "Copy overlays of BUF into current buffer's text properties." > (let ((pt-min-diff (- (with-current-buffer buf (point-min)) (point-min)))) > (dolist (ov (esh--buffer-overlays buf)) > (let* ((start (max (point-min) (- (overlay-start ov) pt-min-diff))) > (end (min (point-max) (- (overlay-end ov) pt-min-diff))) > (ov-props (overlay-properties ov)) > (cat-props (let ((symbol (plist-get ov-props 'category))) > (and symbol (symbol-plist symbol)))) > (face (let ((mem (plist-member ov-props 'face))) > (if mem (cadr mem) (plist-get cat-props 'face)))) > (props (esh--filter-plist (append cat-props ov-props) > (cons 'face esh--overlay-specific-props)))) > (when face > (font-lock-prepend-text-property start end 'face face)) > (add-text-properties start end props))))) What will happen if you have 2 overlays like this: +------------- OV2 -------+ xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx +------- OV1 ---------+ and OV2 has a higher priority than OV1? > >>>>> How did you implement in Lisp the "last resort" of > >>>>> comparison, which compares addresses of the C structs? > >>>> > >>>> I didn't :) > >>> > >>> So it isn't really a solution ;-) > >> > >> It's not a full reimplementation, but it's enough of a solution for > >> me :) The docs say “If SORTED is non-‘nil’, the list is in > >> decreasing order of priority”, and that's what my implementation > >> does. > > > > Then there will be use cases where your solution will give a wrong > > value to the text property that replaces the overlays. > > Snap. Do you have a concrete example? I imagine this would happen if two overlays are added to the same range of text, with no explicit priority? Or with explicitly equal priority. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Feb 05 14:11:02 2017 Received: (at 25592) by debbugs.gnu.org; 5 Feb 2017 19:11:02 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56897 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1caSDG-00013g-7k for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 05 Feb 2017 14:11:02 -0500 Received: from mout.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.135]:52341) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1caSDD-00013C-DA for 25592@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 05 Feb 2017 14:11:00 -0500 Received: from [192.168.1.106] ([67.186.135.89]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (mreue004 [212.227.15.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0Lsuti-1cTKdy2rk2-012awU; Sun, 05 Feb 2017 20:10:52 +0100 Subject: Re: bug#25592: Feature request: sorting overlays To: Eli Zaretskii References: <837f5avzdm.fsf@gnu.org> <75813a2b-ba63-e356-d766-cd9ae77b28e2@live.com> <83mve4uxwr.fsf@gnu.org> <83tw8bt1mh.fsf@gnu.org> <1d90ade3-b0a4-f07a-d424-b052a68fd4a7@live.com> <83r33etluz.fsf@gnu.org> <21abc5a1-0777-cd33-ff26-2cd0853e9161@live.com> <83wpd47aqi.fsf@gnu.org> From: =?UTF-8?Q?Cl=c3=a9ment_Pit--Claudel?= Message-ID: <31fe1609-78eb-6a03-762e-431fd7cfd987@live.com> Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2017 14:10:40 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <83wpd47aqi.fsf@gnu.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="gP4gqV8DXQmjXqXKjX9MRFKhFlOcRhIrd" X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:ft9HT/rCE0CVk7wRHWEA1AENiYuWNR1S+QIl+aKN2Cb8n0wwK8+ TjoblY1UC538aoNLOvXlu1HE41u4twSpU553av4BsVlnUCKxjc8rKuStJ4pKmULmMnUnBMv SJJkpkyUZJ94ji4S26Fx+xP6jkEOwueq1GX7kpN8Mvup/oTBtgMaMRot3zrp51mwrbzM2bX HSAVXVINs+PPNSPkWQKYQ== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:oLxH01cYwFM=:QHg0hICohnod3fZC2raEhT q2mKf9EopCvC1w7uylaOGGKhZwwIHbpiUxump+cm9TvdZotJ9ecmlVcXNCc+nTXcWZqGGESmD +obsknpIU5CrrtRqnTNk+xE6lfKkNs9XVHhPjgC9rNcVs2U3ZWlT49ms+BYYegiIFCgxZp3rv cVyDUOqboyWYEwY92BY1Q+UdOWwOeikbJTNiJtgrkdP492GSJaA0ocX42HNmrYU+0y44dkDPl WtSbpGlbhovYcRCTqQV9PjnrvcucwLN9kFsOuA/pmpejFS372iDqSoraB7l8eDSbIN388pefr kSNqiaLbYgiWteUqUl8X3zaqLUXDufP5WJ1Tn2K6Tb9R123Dz6U5nADRue+BZExh6pFHeDCpR YaF8FoC0XvmfZHvwmj/wbawMzM3193Jay0AxK2xpzYXYvdhxtPDTRTL4w22ZRa6F7a50e4aNd VZP93isrE9jfcFoJvpTr2eKfOHA+zbUZNI5BYwm3k4bWmme19LGCHueIjLxx2SNYqVrhCxz2l PLMDnmIB4oVGbUIGoOQg8y61CdrlZ7a091txWKtJ3wx0VvCEfmlGCuMCO7vhIIvWxKhyhyyFe VdNAhAvHv8KhxQp5VvZtYhOGGor7FLCnaN+ITHtrB0SFCyKfXV/Jbyj0kZF6wVl8EAel4wK3c AnrMtcyz2IMZTg1BtK7NCn9Ql/OmFrSkNA2MFMDGkfmi5CmuD1yNeXurEa+usQsID0cw= X-Spam-Score: -0.9 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 25592 Cc: 25592@debbugs.gnu.org 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: -0.9 (/) This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --gP4gqV8DXQmjXqXKjX9MRFKhFlOcRhIrd Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="6w61aqTH2pjQq2eRkqCHWhL6TEOmT1UV9"; protected-headers="v1" From: =?UTF-8?Q?Cl=c3=a9ment_Pit--Claudel?= To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: 25592@debbugs.gnu.org Message-ID: <31fe1609-78eb-6a03-762e-431fd7cfd987@live.com> Subject: Re: bug#25592: Feature request: sorting overlays References: <837f5avzdm.fsf@gnu.org> <75813a2b-ba63-e356-d766-cd9ae77b28e2@live.com> <83mve4uxwr.fsf@gnu.org> <83tw8bt1mh.fsf@gnu.org> <1d90ade3-b0a4-f07a-d424-b052a68fd4a7@live.com> <83r33etluz.fsf@gnu.org> <21abc5a1-0777-cd33-ff26-2cd0853e9161@live.com> <83wpd47aqi.fsf@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: <83wpd47aqi.fsf@gnu.org> --6w61aqTH2pjQq2eRkqCHWhL6TEOmT1UV9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2017-02-05 13:28, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > What will happen if you have 2 overlays like this: >=20 > +------------- OV2 -------+ > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > +------- OV1 ---------+ >=20 > and OV2 has a higher priority than OV1? The two overlays get sorted as (OV1 OV2). Then my code applies OV1's pro= perties to the range covered by OV1, and OV2's properties to the range co= vered by OV2, which override those of OV1 in the overlapping range (excep= t in the case of face properties, which get appended instead of overridin= g). Cl=C3=A9ment. --6w61aqTH2pjQq2eRkqCHWhL6TEOmT1UV9-- --gP4gqV8DXQmjXqXKjX9MRFKhFlOcRhIrd Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJYl3iwAAoJEPqg+cTm90wj9i8P/jarW4sCwOKGkisKwj6N9ZdD mItWy+vshJasAHB8s1Lea4j/TuZMDP+8VEdDx8BJh1hCMukWhu2ZhiI4gnUNOU6D jD318D6UzSZNmsX8z2I/u5cWzzwEB3eEx/aAhMC9zBwSoir2RaZlxMsiysBB8kZJ HGm9FPr+qJThD2je+51bERONiwcN0v4Kr/ZN6OcuMUA3zsl+g9m178IyAZ3nmPL+ ZMzjEVyMRQxkO5rGy1l/n9SL6X19ci84hGYZNBm5Ojkm60BCvO8ombBJyQwJIGuT j2pA98PM1gorxazH5Dkx/CMrJ5frdnkVi8z30VB8O2wF7I+bqMXpDBu6GgqTwIsV 2a3/eFtah4FMuX4L4uCWA8vm7GK7aViGdLAMbwlhWGMcq9TzE0Wrs9QIDedUSstD cSd6scLMuc4lEFD/3zXGljFftbxMFZNKr4AHewJ2cbH1EcT6NFfnbDQiPA0Dqm2m dlteUogNAvyfxkiYyEjD2A6wizBDUMBBtxxku6Eab/cFkDcce+WkkUv1qGzMJKXI RrlpVyU2HRGOlUASR5OxeHHRmlKx6kFoopQ7aPC0w7x12ulQeuTtVSwWq+fsuviD irwgnDvFOwAXO2VlN2FN1CIlZkpi4/eAdpJ6QaBm+p2hgbxflBQPpmibbHDTNgVN +QAGQYBjY+isW5d72dyS =GoD1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --gP4gqV8DXQmjXqXKjX9MRFKhFlOcRhIrd-- From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Feb 05 14:43:51 2017 Received: (at 25592) by debbugs.gnu.org; 5 Feb 2017 19:43:51 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56922 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1caSj0-0001q3-RN for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 05 Feb 2017 14:43:50 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:46705) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1caSiz-0001pq-1J for 25592@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 05 Feb 2017 14:43:49 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1caSiq-0007mX-Su for 25592@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 05 Feb 2017 14:43:43 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_40,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:38495) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1caSiq-0007mE-Qc; Sun, 05 Feb 2017 14:43:40 -0500 Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:3939 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1caSip-0001L8-KM; Sun, 05 Feb 2017 14:43:40 -0500 Date: Sun, 05 Feb 2017 21:43:31 +0200 Message-Id: <83o9yg77a4.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: =?utf-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9ment?= Pit--Claudel In-reply-to: <31fe1609-78eb-6a03-762e-431fd7cfd987@live.com> (message from =?utf-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9ment?= Pit--Claudel on Sun, 5 Feb 2017 14:10:40 -0500) Subject: Re: bug#25592: Feature request: sorting overlays References: <837f5avzdm.fsf@gnu.org> <75813a2b-ba63-e356-d766-cd9ae77b28e2@live.com> <83mve4uxwr.fsf@gnu.org> <83tw8bt1mh.fsf@gnu.org> <1d90ade3-b0a4-f07a-d424-b052a68fd4a7@live.com> <83r33etluz.fsf@gnu.org> <21abc5a1-0777-cd33-ff26-2cd0853e9161@live.com> <83wpd47aqi.fsf@gnu.org> <31fe1609-78eb-6a03-762e-431fd7cfd987@live.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-Spam-Score: -5.0 (-----) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 25592 Cc: 25592@debbugs.gnu.org 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: , Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -5.0 (-----) > Cc: 25592@debbugs.gnu.org > From: Clément Pit--Claudel > Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2017 14:10:40 -0500 > > > What will happen if you have 2 overlays like this: > > > > +------------- OV2 -------+ > > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > +------- OV1 ---------+ > > > > and OV2 has a higher priority than OV1? > > The two overlays get sorted as (OV1 OV2). But OV2 has a higher priority, so it should be the first in the sorted order, no? From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Feb 05 14:52:08 2017 Received: (at 25592) by debbugs.gnu.org; 5 Feb 2017 19:52:08 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56940 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1caSr1-00022S-5B for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 05 Feb 2017 14:52:07 -0500 Received: from mout.kundenserver.de ([217.72.192.74]:52704) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1caSqy-00021u-Rk for 25592@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 05 Feb 2017 14:52:05 -0500 Received: from [192.168.1.106] ([67.186.135.89]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (mreue102 [212.227.15.184]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MAMfa-1ckxFP3pAA-00BZVF; Sun, 05 Feb 2017 20:51:58 +0100 Subject: Re: bug#25592: Feature request: sorting overlays To: Eli Zaretskii References: <837f5avzdm.fsf@gnu.org> <75813a2b-ba63-e356-d766-cd9ae77b28e2@live.com> <83mve4uxwr.fsf@gnu.org> <83tw8bt1mh.fsf@gnu.org> <1d90ade3-b0a4-f07a-d424-b052a68fd4a7@live.com> <83r33etluz.fsf@gnu.org> <21abc5a1-0777-cd33-ff26-2cd0853e9161@live.com> <83wpd47aqi.fsf@gnu.org> <31fe1609-78eb-6a03-762e-431fd7cfd987@live.com> <83o9yg77a4.fsf@gnu.org> From: =?UTF-8?Q?Cl=c3=a9ment_Pit--Claudel?= Message-ID: <8be0ce54-f490-556b-4d84-3c1c9a146e34@live.com> Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2017 14:51:55 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <83o9yg77a4.fsf@gnu.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="4DCOIFGDnrDRVql9FFHaLwTclO3gLiOO4" X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:mm99HsmXdw+uSI4FuICuX/cPKdITNly0QdgMe2D9D5ObnFa6Q9Z CsRnFNEKfK+cTW3pbazOcxAG5xDoz9vCw7B7iETRZ6QfdHs3YKB2w1+2PTH/fXfQm1nrG5z GKK7CJyuG2WMlQszs0NywxNNDvRQM6jfCrzhyIqkgAyF8wUTSSTwL1x14QFTirY+sMDEq8i b36bYqkFyN2/9C5lbb5Dg== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:OBONVZdDKsk=:bDCmgjSOpgPUo8a+pP2gD0 cR0qDm8xnPgqimmlJtQJzn2DGqfsBphXk7EB3JnxA2/3l/8thBHdCVivnR85EflLEC99Wv61u SxWOt4dfzVWlib68ij3W2j9kILys/edBzUGxbHsjjDuecvZpUYv3uY2y0aXjBOVQNf0r3zSFy 1sghw7ll+SJvsLR+PCv7tiCBnWuh3Lr6oJ18KBGdU3h98GlNRE0021xiWM9dFsQspqYgo5IqI qKzPjRb/DF7iZwGUjJK9m7W3xTSroIa6+uO72RglRLmCGiJUAMi/pFlW3m5KOriyonJZWQD0R tGcQzM3qXZHaSHD0Qb3Xjs/0R9rEoFIYqTTYnPh97GlhuM4NvA/QKnK/TbYjBlovDOUY/02X4 AmfYWomVdJnRkr9Kda8Y2K99o0SDhCjpDOg0o7xa7ckZcGp9W7GZT3rD7xtFNXo+1RA2IhnWi Rwl9D7rUWySR/5fdaMfNDcAZhAWdik4cbO4TrLHg4O6/OanokyPNV5yFh5Z3iDOU12fj6gccR YznIhty7vbTJtK04U3XCUmb56XvFbd5wzdBQ1J1qEr07qoHbm2076pNN7p6S84QTrv+PK5s4K LCV/vqMFRZX5McZw6hbwHlRFVuh9YA876O8Z79YY3jUALT3Xw1TtxpphRVE3YaPpmVKKEp5L2 PB7Uk+b+Tk5fhKaKgQ2uRVZbC864TK5nB3x26prbngv9O0WobAhjcD9cX4bfeQ7NJBXQ= X-Spam-Score: -0.9 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 25592 Cc: 25592@debbugs.gnu.org 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: -0.9 (/) This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --4DCOIFGDnrDRVql9FFHaLwTclO3gLiOO4 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="ChEEPu1oEHTKriA3a5x9GUgSem4a7lMBU"; protected-headers="v1" From: =?UTF-8?Q?Cl=c3=a9ment_Pit--Claudel?= To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: 25592@debbugs.gnu.org Message-ID: <8be0ce54-f490-556b-4d84-3c1c9a146e34@live.com> Subject: Re: bug#25592: Feature request: sorting overlays References: <837f5avzdm.fsf@gnu.org> <75813a2b-ba63-e356-d766-cd9ae77b28e2@live.com> <83mve4uxwr.fsf@gnu.org> <83tw8bt1mh.fsf@gnu.org> <1d90ade3-b0a4-f07a-d424-b052a68fd4a7@live.com> <83r33etluz.fsf@gnu.org> <21abc5a1-0777-cd33-ff26-2cd0853e9161@live.com> <83wpd47aqi.fsf@gnu.org> <31fe1609-78eb-6a03-762e-431fd7cfd987@live.com> <83o9yg77a4.fsf@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: <83o9yg77a4.fsf@gnu.org> --ChEEPu1oEHTKriA3a5x9GUgSem4a7lMBU Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2017-02-05 14:43, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> Cc: 25592@debbugs.gnu.org >> From: Cl=C3=A9ment Pit--Claudel >> Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2017 14:10:40 -0500 >> >>> What will happen if you have 2 overlays like this: >>> >>> +------------- OV2 -------+ >>> xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>> +------- OV1 ---------+ >>> >>> and OV2 has a higher priority than OV1? >> >> The two overlays get sorted as (OV1 OV2). >=20 > But OV2 has a higher priority, so it should be the first in the sorted > order, no? I process them in order of increasing priority, so OV1 gets processed fir= st. --ChEEPu1oEHTKriA3a5x9GUgSem4a7lMBU-- --4DCOIFGDnrDRVql9FFHaLwTclO3gLiOO4 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJYl4JbAAoJEPqg+cTm90wjxzkQAKnvKAyRNU5D96ehgdgtLsvt eb1SWdXn0r/JISgXl/wMIYtW5azqwzrbOqeisnBu9GTxL57Jx+rqD2AFQDOOhF38 lDWctYnKtxeiNSImN4k/iykrryL6mQuc/vzfKDm8/Pf95hOCE/m/elzwZ0ywwzYL Wt7zpMeh7H/z/r9sRdV4+f+GJaVuSCoe4MmtvIb22QWKPBAzYfvWYJDUl+1wK21V fkeJRsR3rLq8EW07NWAkJvsX44NkvCz6WXbJpxbrMR4kS+AxMv5ot47ofq6A8yJ3 qFEC5kWvkwNW5duSDcVXbe/D9zSDHV765Zs618GJWo9LK0B7bNzQv8kRGqX5Sqb/ z1p6DpbqnoKxbyPpmTWZwBhILf5WX0qxe7iVLTk0CN02sKL7nhlrby5AIt1CsOv2 mDaMFrTc2elMpG84q8NwMxBLHnFy9emlZYFbNkj78nQ6ux5N11ShCCzI/3UZT7Pc tsdXUNQSZqGNrvyBLdjOvK3sQDmxmNy4+wOUbfgQ/+X0TO4PgpToebniHAvyDKBL nlaYheu16O/DgsCAr9sG4D4OKwiT33FRb7bNA+FcgCyxsWq6gq8D/HBcQ8ys0SC8 kwloKDErBssXEg2RH3URwuKEb2qxetmQIFwSM0rm4e8hBcwVC3QJIsnZs7n+Ff0z JyW/tUTg08x+w8W6hyiA =Bck7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --4DCOIFGDnrDRVql9FFHaLwTclO3gLiOO4-- From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Feb 07 12:13:52 2017 Received: (at 25592) by debbugs.gnu.org; 7 Feb 2017 17:13:52 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59209 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cb9Ky-0004SC-Lc for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 12:13:52 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:50163) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cb9Kx-0004Rz-47 for 25592@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 12:13:51 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cb9Ko-0008VJ-Iu for 25592@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 12:13:45 -0500 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,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:42495) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cb9Ko-0008V3-Fo; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 12:13:42 -0500 Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:1887 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1cb9Km-000649-Ot; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 12:13:41 -0500 Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2017 19:13:39 +0200 Message-Id: <83mvdx6i0s.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: =?utf-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9ment?= Pit--Claudel In-reply-to: <8be0ce54-f490-556b-4d84-3c1c9a146e34@live.com> (message from =?utf-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9ment?= Pit--Claudel on Sun, 5 Feb 2017 14:51:55 -0500) Subject: Re: bug#25592: Feature request: sorting overlays References: <837f5avzdm.fsf@gnu.org> <75813a2b-ba63-e356-d766-cd9ae77b28e2@live.com> <83mve4uxwr.fsf@gnu.org> <83tw8bt1mh.fsf@gnu.org> <1d90ade3-b0a4-f07a-d424-b052a68fd4a7@live.com> <83r33etluz.fsf@gnu.org> <21abc5a1-0777-cd33-ff26-2cd0853e9161@live.com> <83wpd47aqi.fsf@gnu.org> <31fe1609-78eb-6a03-762e-431fd7cfd987@live.com> <83o9yg77a4.fsf@gnu.org> <8be0ce54-f490-556b-4d84-3c1c9a146e34@live.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-Spam-Score: -5.0 (-----) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 25592 Cc: 25592@debbugs.gnu.org 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: , Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -5.0 (-----) > Cc: 25592@debbugs.gnu.org > From: Clément Pit--Claudel > Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2017 14:51:55 -0500 > > >>> What will happen if you have 2 overlays like this: > >>> > >>> +------------- OV2 -------+ > >>> xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > >>> +------- OV1 ---------+ > >>> > >>> and OV2 has a higher priority than OV1? > >> > >> The two overlays get sorted as (OV1 OV2). > > > > But OV2 has a higher priority, so it should be the first in the sorted > > order, no? > > I process them in order of increasing priority, so OV1 gets processed first. So you actually apply _all_ of the overlays in the buffer, one by one? That's really inefficient. With my proposal, you'd only need to apply at most one overlay at each position where some overlay begins or ends, and do that for much fewer text segments. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Feb 07 14:17:35 2017 Received: (at 25592) by debbugs.gnu.org; 7 Feb 2017 19:17:35 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59275 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cbBGh-0000cK-Hs for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 14:17:35 -0500 Received: from mout.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.133]:53646) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cbBGd-0000c4-Gs for 25592@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 14:17:33 -0500 Received: from [128.30.9.127] ([128.30.9.127]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (mreue003 [212.227.15.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LiYwK-1c10ZR1f80-00cfgc; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 20:17:21 +0100 Subject: Re: bug#25592: Feature request: sorting overlays To: Eli Zaretskii References: <837f5avzdm.fsf@gnu.org> <75813a2b-ba63-e356-d766-cd9ae77b28e2@live.com> <83mve4uxwr.fsf@gnu.org> <83tw8bt1mh.fsf@gnu.org> <1d90ade3-b0a4-f07a-d424-b052a68fd4a7@live.com> <83r33etluz.fsf@gnu.org> <21abc5a1-0777-cd33-ff26-2cd0853e9161@live.com> <83wpd47aqi.fsf@gnu.org> <31fe1609-78eb-6a03-762e-431fd7cfd987@live.com> <83o9yg77a4.fsf@gnu.org> <8be0ce54-f490-556b-4d84-3c1c9a146e34@live.com> <83mvdx6i0s.fsf@gnu.org> From: =?UTF-8?Q?Cl=c3=a9ment_Pit--Claudel?= Message-ID: <63b6a300-4892-260a-2054-c922485ee192@live.com> Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2017 14:17:13 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <83mvdx6i0s.fsf@gnu.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="JQH9CTcRKb1nlt6PAlhpA6gkLtgMOGS2P" X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:BC5kFyZ7k6bMAjgbxy/QwpS9xMFEqHBR2E2rnMihIn9Ragxh85l WdzkQWgZfZ0PQ45wTK+P0d19Tr5vuiEpTq4y0RwMFJZnsbH4jEBcS9CTdn33CHia3MujlYj vQVLjBl1hv/gpGWKYToSTI9Gu8qOfho8ynsb1b18RQCsBdzaXwGH9Y4Hw85KoBFVk24ZKMT c2xu2eWeigzknqhca0zEA== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:bqCNnrYsI2w=:WOzj95HF5MqldFqAWoW1Oo ughC6ymOzmww3wV73gl8wLSZNxJXFYFKyywzc7uN7H6DtSInHaau5Cx7y1fmrokzYzzTZcttK UcmdNZMKe/r/HPrBRRCkruOf44H4970vOOaTbIXJlaCXD3g9dXu3VttIy/0rKG575oiicJRNl BBQL1/8Zx+2Gpn+V3K4p+6oAizQiG0LNudqZr3vlrH/uMhuVLsyBBxTfihGUJrv6rQvnAn50w PpMri7J5AU/vtoeFHCWk7fLW+F1QRZK3b2S6D97GqcU6nF6eoQwsGJXIVaBBHWR83YsVAokNP 8H8BGadRBofDQKhf2JqkNpBM0JwfZoqUyakooyT97kOhG+vsagPc+rL4vLqCzIr37hrmBIUXl ICq9MDWb3NA+4Hed2tGv/SFiVdpqMXh3lBCtfFxdnOeZNhNUg3n9JdkygLYMwkmDlGAP9HCGE 6dcQmRvcTAyX7rAcftrIbVlgm7VA08zhV2e11kmlZFST3wvuIFdN3mCSYEiiqakywRd5HU9jv qxsoffauDqOHpyXWj0dSx4TW2jmhKQyQ+pfNY5WYkmAnm50xLyx8JBhgMomAw6UjlaCzpIWrQ Q+XlC2FSogDUbLfMrWMzOOb6LWn0ZsTrxL656qPrsT3akz/y2NsSU2LgVD9g3tdURwfzO4XNd TIuSgtjVT7Zj9JUKwhfA5CjmpnaN/vGpTznyM5u8xRaLMUPCf7RDCfrZdx685l2L8HFU= X-Spam-Score: -0.4 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 25592 Cc: 25592@debbugs.gnu.org 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: -0.4 (/) This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --JQH9CTcRKb1nlt6PAlhpA6gkLtgMOGS2P Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="8oCSg84sGAMs6JIqcplsthhvwbs8CC3ew"; protected-headers="v1" From: =?UTF-8?Q?Cl=c3=a9ment_Pit--Claudel?= To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: 25592@debbugs.gnu.org Message-ID: <63b6a300-4892-260a-2054-c922485ee192@live.com> Subject: Re: bug#25592: Feature request: sorting overlays References: <837f5avzdm.fsf@gnu.org> <75813a2b-ba63-e356-d766-cd9ae77b28e2@live.com> <83mve4uxwr.fsf@gnu.org> <83tw8bt1mh.fsf@gnu.org> <1d90ade3-b0a4-f07a-d424-b052a68fd4a7@live.com> <83r33etluz.fsf@gnu.org> <21abc5a1-0777-cd33-ff26-2cd0853e9161@live.com> <83wpd47aqi.fsf@gnu.org> <31fe1609-78eb-6a03-762e-431fd7cfd987@live.com> <83o9yg77a4.fsf@gnu.org> <8be0ce54-f490-556b-4d84-3c1c9a146e34@live.com> <83mvdx6i0s.fsf@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: <83mvdx6i0s.fsf@gnu.org> --8oCSg84sGAMs6JIqcplsthhvwbs8CC3ew Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2017-02-07 12:13, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> Cc: 25592@debbugs.gnu.org >> From: Cl=C3=A9ment Pit--Claudel >> Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2017 14:51:55 -0500 >> >>>>> What will happen if you have 2 overlays like this: >>>>> >>>>> +------------- OV2 -------+ >>>>> xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>>>> +------- OV1 ---------+ >>>>> >>>>> and OV2 has a higher priority than OV1? >>>> >>>> The two overlays get sorted as (OV1 OV2). >>> >>> But OV2 has a higher priority, so it should be the first in the sorte= d >>> order, no? >> >> I process them in order of increasing priority, so OV1 gets processed = first. >=20 > So you actually apply _all_ of the overlays in the buffer, one by one? > That's really inefficient. With my proposal, you'd only need to apply > at most one overlay at each position where some overlay begins or > ends, and do that for much fewer text segments. I think I may have misunderstood your proposal, or failed to express what= I was trying to achieve :/ If OV1 has face "(:weight bold)" and OV2 has= face "(:slant italic)", I want to save both 'face properties. Can I real= ly do that by applying at most one overlay at each position? Cl=C3=A9ment. --8oCSg84sGAMs6JIqcplsthhvwbs8CC3ew-- --JQH9CTcRKb1nlt6PAlhpA6gkLtgMOGS2P Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJYmh05AAoJEPqg+cTm90wjoEEP/2B/RLAhKLqSUx1yBnm6FKAB K/m2IcGrf2KUyxg7ouT/BYnB8KKIKdma8Nb42d0O8+lQUrmeLhV0DwmlB46B7a27 bPlP4WmHtpsAkVrM2OTNPp/XTDLGM2hkEjCOmjG+00/z5KUn8FKIQaauXYRO/Si6 PF1ZnDAOWnxDj1LTpS4q+wCTxalRWXFlrEYh64LHgHFxECfNke0otbofzCq71oeZ P6PnHeGyrkRiI4PYgf9MVEnXVwRVa770svvsGVTjdrrDk8uYLaFr1teK5di+gSEd Rt6sXC+6AcEMLuvvaXFbODGLWVE2IZ+DV18XIeeZ/z8a1OjLUmzAUbT7zOTgnXN5 A5UP+rW1woFWDUxxrpORz5U5ESNjXMrbf1pxL/w9flO7TI1nAoMZVNfw37LvdgDQ CBITHrB5nrqukXZ19YP/jGu1AqMLvRaqZpNQFM9XNK9ukkWOUDYZ1Y5DFcMXmeC8 slOSGpLgp4ni2jyC06Om5zrpankLzgoSsrK1e3xuuTal0isv/DE6T9MN9/HAjQ8T QYkf95xQ/KP9Co0vA9s4GzyKQqYG1ggcDn3TvlH3YipdCPk8Y3SuEIUledp8e6Ai /Z4QIp5sbN+KerVGXI9NPEB2jOg7X9mNy/nspxuAUNLnAgtkEZL1BDQydVOJQ1Gb +L0NLwK7FIRND11haCG6 =ce8S -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --JQH9CTcRKb1nlt6PAlhpA6gkLtgMOGS2P-- From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Feb 07 14:57:11 2017 Received: (at 25592) by debbugs.gnu.org; 7 Feb 2017 19:57:11 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59295 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cbBt1-0001Zs-51 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 14:57:11 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:58902) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cbBt0-0001Zg-56 for 25592@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 14:57:10 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cbBsr-00053s-N4 for 25592@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 14:57:04 -0500 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,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:44239) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cbBsr-00053j-Jj; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 14:57:01 -0500 Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:2026 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1cbBso-0008SO-Qs; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 14:57:01 -0500 Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2017 21:56:46 +0200 Message-Id: <83inol6agx.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: =?utf-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9ment?= Pit--Claudel In-reply-to: <63b6a300-4892-260a-2054-c922485ee192@live.com> (message from =?utf-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9ment?= Pit--Claudel on Tue, 7 Feb 2017 14:17:13 -0500) Subject: Re: bug#25592: Feature request: sorting overlays References: <837f5avzdm.fsf@gnu.org> <75813a2b-ba63-e356-d766-cd9ae77b28e2@live.com> <83mve4uxwr.fsf@gnu.org> <83tw8bt1mh.fsf@gnu.org> <1d90ade3-b0a4-f07a-d424-b052a68fd4a7@live.com> <83r33etluz.fsf@gnu.org> <21abc5a1-0777-cd33-ff26-2cd0853e9161@live.com> <83wpd47aqi.fsf@gnu.org> <31fe1609-78eb-6a03-762e-431fd7cfd987@live.com> <83o9yg77a4.fsf@gnu.org> <8be0ce54-f490-556b-4d84-3c1c9a146e34@live.com> <83mvdx6i0s.fsf@gnu.org> <63b6a300-4892-260a-2054-c922485ee192@live.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-Spam-Score: -5.0 (-----) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 25592 Cc: 25592@debbugs.gnu.org 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: , Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -5.0 (-----) > Cc: 25592@debbugs.gnu.org > From: Clément Pit--Claudel > Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2017 14:17:13 -0500 > > >> I process them in order of increasing priority, so OV1 gets processed first. > > > > So you actually apply _all_ of the overlays in the buffer, one by one? > > That's really inefficient. With my proposal, you'd only need to apply > > at most one overlay at each position where some overlay begins or > > ends, and do that for much fewer text segments. > > I think I may have misunderstood your proposal, or failed to express what I was trying to achieve :/ If OV1 has face "(:weight bold)" and OV2 has face "(:slant italic)", I want to save both 'face properties. Can I really do that by applying at most one overlay at each position? For the face property, no, because it can have many attributes, and they must be merged. Likewise for before-string and after-string properties. But still, these overlays are applied by the display engine in a specific priority order (before-strings in the order of increasing priority, after-strings in the decreasing order) at that particular locations. So you need to do the same to produce the same effect. But for other properties, like the display property, yes, you can apply only the highest. And that was your original example, AFAIR. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Feb 07 15:07:37 2017 Received: (at 25592) by debbugs.gnu.org; 7 Feb 2017 20:07:37 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59307 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cbC37-0001pm-JN for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 15:07:37 -0500 Received: from mout.kundenserver.de ([212.227.17.10]:58745) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cbC35-0001pZ-0x for 25592@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 15:07:36 -0500 Received: from [128.30.9.127] ([128.30.9.127]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (mreue102 [212.227.15.184]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0M6mdY-1cGWVI23vA-00wY2A; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 21:07:28 +0100 Subject: Re: bug#25592: Feature request: sorting overlays To: Eli Zaretskii References: <837f5avzdm.fsf@gnu.org> <75813a2b-ba63-e356-d766-cd9ae77b28e2@live.com> <83mve4uxwr.fsf@gnu.org> <83tw8bt1mh.fsf@gnu.org> <1d90ade3-b0a4-f07a-d424-b052a68fd4a7@live.com> <83r33etluz.fsf@gnu.org> <21abc5a1-0777-cd33-ff26-2cd0853e9161@live.com> <83wpd47aqi.fsf@gnu.org> <31fe1609-78eb-6a03-762e-431fd7cfd987@live.com> <83o9yg77a4.fsf@gnu.org> <8be0ce54-f490-556b-4d84-3c1c9a146e34@live.com> <83mvdx6i0s.fsf@gnu.org> <63b6a300-4892-260a-2054-c922485ee192@live.com> <83inol6agx.fsf@gnu.org> From: =?UTF-8?Q?Cl=c3=a9ment_Pit--Claudel?= Message-ID: <4ce360e1-93b0-988d-89e0-9a5d58fa7d25@live.com> Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2017 15:07:19 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <83inol6agx.fsf@gnu.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="s9c0Sk0Vo1mvN9hfgSQdlh03fnbOGQNgJ" X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:Bcero+75PqBHFJt1jN+pKym60mmh9Bo1NqVjqSXKs1qhwAOKMh8 REkxCU3++5mo0zyl6PLQOIq4lntjzAjRvwUwCZcPE6jaH50GXk2QeKb7Mx1hraSDyhjSk3p tdKeUA51fcvSv3maGx95C/NdyOejANW8s8Erlajgj/B2y3rWy/K957WK17eZ+xBb4v/Lj5i FCuWSReXtuj9zoW8bzUdA== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:8rdctltOaco=:QTF8foX32LSMX4JLTDhlql OAqrQTjmweKPSrSNdREek5uSZZdmKefoPiqUXuF3yVaaRCZxliVN7RUMon2b+Z7YHqItVHyaH xBRm0ckX8wccJVKZfDCnBQYZYTtVIjKfzH7BR1XOCVWAdAlgEdgFe4mNjzWko++cyXyLkv6mQ QVDaMtExqssLym6EXOO0B/sQkQOd7dLGpqUz3oJGGTLz4AW5QHZYdO2OamFOKhbEFHDy8/RRA Y9uBGtd0Q1d7baaGWsZiiAv2OIuPF9DSrkROkJDNAABT1EMmgoKiK5wNQiWZ/JW6IicmAc/wc BheDRymfLD/gmhF0PnTs246kAvlqwiDUtGhLoZiye2YWehSXbuoGzc+c/vpIkCxVvyUGl85AI MD9SmJEm8tGFEzD1uMPkqWGWO016+zIHwvTrkkZzGN75DcgT9c9IF3UHVcUfZmDV6iZ0Kri/g MeVb66JsT6M0wuM3zXrdQR2g6rfKy1qf2ovmBdfq5biTaZCmXZGi/0FVSrjMT6J7Rn7LE9tEc y4+7yJTOKW7Z1KnPjjaImv4DahWOF9hVLiPKwyPX8mxamdSSsw/Nb4NOFiuoJnrpnwCdDPoOJ hx1x1+4GaTWn27AmM/P1otYd+ls+sclTBy6b5amsj3KuItEb7fpoeldG5Ndvr2xiYjizD2taI 0nvvHU9ri181p5hNGZN2hqBL108cZCO9TVyAd8twYmxSNbOM8Z9OuMQGumUfwjt6f7tI= X-Spam-Score: -0.4 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 25592 Cc: 25592@debbugs.gnu.org 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: -0.4 (/) This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --s9c0Sk0Vo1mvN9hfgSQdlh03fnbOGQNgJ Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="MwSRngehNVh5srWFlT9s6jEff9MAbEg2T"; protected-headers="v1" From: =?UTF-8?Q?Cl=c3=a9ment_Pit--Claudel?= To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: 25592@debbugs.gnu.org Message-ID: <4ce360e1-93b0-988d-89e0-9a5d58fa7d25@live.com> Subject: Re: bug#25592: Feature request: sorting overlays References: <837f5avzdm.fsf@gnu.org> <75813a2b-ba63-e356-d766-cd9ae77b28e2@live.com> <83mve4uxwr.fsf@gnu.org> <83tw8bt1mh.fsf@gnu.org> <1d90ade3-b0a4-f07a-d424-b052a68fd4a7@live.com> <83r33etluz.fsf@gnu.org> <21abc5a1-0777-cd33-ff26-2cd0853e9161@live.com> <83wpd47aqi.fsf@gnu.org> <31fe1609-78eb-6a03-762e-431fd7cfd987@live.com> <83o9yg77a4.fsf@gnu.org> <8be0ce54-f490-556b-4d84-3c1c9a146e34@live.com> <83mvdx6i0s.fsf@gnu.org> <63b6a300-4892-260a-2054-c922485ee192@live.com> <83inol6agx.fsf@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: <83inol6agx.fsf@gnu.org> --MwSRngehNVh5srWFlT9s6jEff9MAbEg2T Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2017-02-07 14:56, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > For the face property, no, because it can have many attributes, and > they must be merged. Likewise for before-string and after-string > properties. But still, these overlays are applied by the display > engine in a specific priority order (before-strings in the order of > increasing priority, after-strings in the decreasing order) at that > particular locations. So you need to do the same to produce the same > effect. Indeed, but I don't need to re-sort them at each position: I can just sor= t them once and for all, can't I? > But for other properties, like the display property, yes, you can > apply only the highest. Yup, that makes sense. =20 > And that was your original example, AFAIR. I don't remember; sorry if I was unclear :/ The face property is one of = the ones I care most about, because it's one of the few ones for which "t= ext-property-at" isn't enough. I will try to implement your approach of iterating over ranges of text. = Thanks for all the pointers! Independently of my use case, though, would = you object to a patch adding a function that takes a list of overlays fro= m the same buffer and sorts them? Cl=C3=A9ment. --MwSRngehNVh5srWFlT9s6jEff9MAbEg2T-- --s9c0Sk0Vo1mvN9hfgSQdlh03fnbOGQNgJ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJYmij3AAoJEPqg+cTm90wjDkIP/04ekznwKEsARfpxx8uD03RW fTx5xn1Heb8daBTqD9pOyUAlLltcqAFlnjHnUQ1qhYqC605YlwONAetGnVpru4jL 8arcA/dnmPjrQhKOpbCDeGbfHpMZysClH4ZwCgEwE69rh66svuaznnaScfLcFd8u eFa+HV46t3DR8bCXMolonmNhJlkJUxybEBBId2jSMVw18Q9MS/WgVa68+L/1nxO6 vBCql9mo891xfS1lizZZFDU3bVtt4iSZwzumjhokCUsbKjb5ZLXuUuTBuvbthR5h 88ifwyggN2HD2SA0Tse2Wulek6MDw3AqKDdar8uuQJ8YmWCLrbHCniajbl4WQscg n4vJwmBx4QyW5s4I5Mq2Cd7nB1/w2DrSYPS+UZX+BBYs5r6/nFSMcvvip2hJqvAt L7r4jEgdGG4HMop6M3r9u2P4EUrYDwRYwLGUASD1aOenObsDLRRzOQ6yjrpwYl9G BqaBbie9UGTU8JU4JoE7b50UMQH9zuyiQTgOe4wb4urmXArC5uvWl3UZVIqxqIOg jIHM8zHlfrHgshCfalCmJRhmiMQCZLFjAB0F9rKt9G3rhL8CfCN0V1qpXeVaEJQr lxxq8mVfXJHQw7CAGo4aqmjtPdUR+dc492eTRqZK7JgWinTLDpAoJMmKWeJD/tFf 3CncfzZHdNOkYvpAMA1z =sUN8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --s9c0Sk0Vo1mvN9hfgSQdlh03fnbOGQNgJ-- From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Feb 08 12:22:34 2017 Received: (at 25592) by debbugs.gnu.org; 8 Feb 2017 17:22:34 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60452 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cbVwv-0001jK-S1 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 08 Feb 2017 12:22:34 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:50377) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cbVwu-0001j9-UI for 25592@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 08 Feb 2017 12:22:33 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cbVwl-0001yi-QG for 25592@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 08 Feb 2017 12:22:27 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_40,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:59050) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cbVwl-0001ye-My; Wed, 08 Feb 2017 12:22:23 -0500 Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:2950 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1cbVwk-0005xp-33; Wed, 08 Feb 2017 12:22:23 -0500 Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2017 19:22:22 +0200 Message-Id: <83bmuc61ip.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: =?utf-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9ment?= Pit--Claudel In-reply-to: <4ce360e1-93b0-988d-89e0-9a5d58fa7d25@live.com> (message from =?utf-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9ment?= Pit--Claudel on Tue, 7 Feb 2017 15:07:19 -0500) Subject: Re: bug#25592: Feature request: sorting overlays References: <837f5avzdm.fsf@gnu.org> <75813a2b-ba63-e356-d766-cd9ae77b28e2@live.com> <83mve4uxwr.fsf@gnu.org> <83tw8bt1mh.fsf@gnu.org> <1d90ade3-b0a4-f07a-d424-b052a68fd4a7@live.com> <83r33etluz.fsf@gnu.org> <21abc5a1-0777-cd33-ff26-2cd0853e9161@live.com> <83wpd47aqi.fsf@gnu.org> <31fe1609-78eb-6a03-762e-431fd7cfd987@live.com> <83o9yg77a4.fsf@gnu.org> <8be0ce54-f490-556b-4d84-3c1c9a146e34@live.com> <83mvdx6i0s.fsf@gnu.org> <63b6a300-4892-260a-2054-c922485ee192@live.com> <83inol6agx.fsf@gnu.org> <4ce360e1-93b0-988d-89e0-9a5d58fa7d25@live.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-Spam-Score: -5.0 (-----) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 25592 Cc: 25592@debbugs.gnu.org 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: , Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -5.0 (-----) > Cc: 25592@debbugs.gnu.org > From: Clément Pit--Claudel > Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2017 15:07:19 -0500 > > would you object to a patch adding a function that takes a list of overlays from the same buffer and sorts them? I don't think such a functionality will see too much use. But won't object if someone wants to implement it. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Feb 09 14:50:47 2017 Received: (at 25592-done) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Feb 2017 19:50:47 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33442 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cbuju-0003Xz-OD for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 09 Feb 2017 14:50:46 -0500 Received: from mout.kundenserver.de ([212.227.17.13]:64165) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cbujs-0003Xj-RY for 25592-done@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 09 Feb 2017 14:50:45 -0500 Received: from [18.111.113.197] ([18.111.113.197]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (mreue104 [212.227.15.184]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0Lu4L0-1cSOsP23j4-011UvY; Thu, 09 Feb 2017 20:50:35 +0100 Subject: Re: bug#25592: Feature request: sorting overlays To: Eli Zaretskii References: <837f5avzdm.fsf@gnu.org> <75813a2b-ba63-e356-d766-cd9ae77b28e2@live.com> <83mve4uxwr.fsf@gnu.org> <83tw8bt1mh.fsf@gnu.org> <1d90ade3-b0a4-f07a-d424-b052a68fd4a7@live.com> <83r33etluz.fsf@gnu.org> <21abc5a1-0777-cd33-ff26-2cd0853e9161@live.com> <83wpd47aqi.fsf@gnu.org> <31fe1609-78eb-6a03-762e-431fd7cfd987@live.com> <83o9yg77a4.fsf@gnu.org> <8be0ce54-f490-556b-4d84-3c1c9a146e34@live.com> <83mvdx6i0s.fsf@gnu.org> <63b6a300-4892-260a-2054-c922485ee192@live.com> <83inol6agx.fsf@gnu.org> <4ce360e1-93b0-988d-89e0-9a5d58fa7d25@live.com> <83bmuc61ip.fsf@gnu.org> From: =?UTF-8?Q?Cl=c3=a9ment_Pit--Claudel?= Message-ID: Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2017 14:50:23 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <83bmuc61ip.fsf@gnu.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="nRfm25bcpdRU9h03mGUKLecPJ8fbcgASe" X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:d1UpjN/zcesJAu3oygzxaGsM3KopYbw/Vx3YpVz6EaVJGG9d0W6 UDL5/XPXEIO0c2h+ts0EUvRbv51ECUYwKXdQcipQ2a3MiXLMUOi9Vx4PvJQwQ298LqS18HZ IBRG7jgz+yApYrxsihnZ8CRlR0lpAjR4VZtPqZkAKu+keZarmkGy1rD5g3mM7p+z1t86UQo uEt5cFkKCPp/0qZHv2knQ== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:rbtkIu0EiK8=:KKBHs1y7/87A0K2YuSZJYA cq8z+n1eMHWu52zPV0blSZ4jRT8NU/SGSEGh61Qnw4r+iIOIDRapVQtBAGQ8+pDdlFeRDbcve v/dKhW9ywg4duMiY1xJG2TB+6JtPRlvLiyI9Rd2NRQY5TMEjumDcbdwfrG58jNVw63AP9UuLf EXnJHYiPf9Mo+7iyr1uojWEE4x2cyKJgw6quHMM58FsnzSZvz7GZjVL16Ms9s4piNkkSv7Xxm ng/pyByZLy8BklEtq8o5BLibKwjh0AHT4r910LYjQjXA0ZDXTmlfMBgtfGydx/hN4hcYvZgq/ 9kgtLDxVISrfsnSvky50eMTDBNn3ZJaw9HF/fRMZxYNqRNiuplzV0fwbIuCvjl0/6XZuEAXQF LQreZjc20wxiA4t2D/Q3X16Si7trmVNKepKuRQVIc2404OcFf/T1r79Wt6Ywr4fjg5N7Cz/M1 qJDkrOuFc0l7EtX8XlD0n2UWszTsduPzPreG8k0tiwB1qRD/PXiPPL8LhWSl1btwmJbKUgUIC gY1hkKBfpbtukgfpflhNEcfUIcSCoN7OpqPfmDrToQqVMr1tXLnw0k/l7RL5/1VK9Sj5d7vrU kLSXaAy+fMMw/q+2egw1KqZVg6dUucXsMyOt1AR6xNj6xRFWRZCPudyvZXkVKGdIf4BNfJyBr ncSX8W8RhRiRkffT4TBQpplOYTjASTH7Bzb7YVFoWxsRsSUJkqioyUCUnbqQCGI5R9xc= X-Spam-Score: -0.4 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 25592-done Cc: 25592-done@debbugs.gnu.org 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: -0.4 (/) This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --nRfm25bcpdRU9h03mGUKLecPJ8fbcgASe Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="bFndfdOgGq3Dsg1mc2fTqkuHD4qAKoOmi"; protected-headers="v1" From: =?UTF-8?Q?Cl=c3=a9ment_Pit--Claudel?= To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: 25592-done@debbugs.gnu.org Message-ID: Subject: Re: bug#25592: Feature request: sorting overlays References: <837f5avzdm.fsf@gnu.org> <75813a2b-ba63-e356-d766-cd9ae77b28e2@live.com> <83mve4uxwr.fsf@gnu.org> <83tw8bt1mh.fsf@gnu.org> <1d90ade3-b0a4-f07a-d424-b052a68fd4a7@live.com> <83r33etluz.fsf@gnu.org> <21abc5a1-0777-cd33-ff26-2cd0853e9161@live.com> <83wpd47aqi.fsf@gnu.org> <31fe1609-78eb-6a03-762e-431fd7cfd987@live.com> <83o9yg77a4.fsf@gnu.org> <8be0ce54-f490-556b-4d84-3c1c9a146e34@live.com> <83mvdx6i0s.fsf@gnu.org> <63b6a300-4892-260a-2054-c922485ee192@live.com> <83inol6agx.fsf@gnu.org> <4ce360e1-93b0-988d-89e0-9a5d58fa7d25@live.com> <83bmuc61ip.fsf@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: <83bmuc61ip.fsf@gnu.org> --bFndfdOgGq3Dsg1mc2fTqkuHD4qAKoOmi Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2017-02-08 12:22, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> Cc: 25592@debbugs.gnu.org >> From: Cl=C3=A9ment Pit--Claudel >> Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2017 15:07:19 -0500 >> >> would you object to a patch adding a function that takes a list of ove= rlays from the same buffer and sorts them? >=20 > I don't think such a functionality will see too much use. But won't > object if someone wants to implement it. Ok. I'll consider implementing this, but I'll implement your other sugges= tion first. This bug can be closed :) Thanks! Cl=C3=A9ment. --bFndfdOgGq3Dsg1mc2fTqkuHD4qAKoOmi-- --nRfm25bcpdRU9h03mGUKLecPJ8fbcgASe Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJYnMf/AAoJEPqg+cTm90wjU6AP/0fuxsdIqmvfWEwjhC9FfSWT HsbyJPExNsbvpxP1rbJqvZx6oFPZ1rus5M6gCFg8lW4dtRPaY3DpUwjqBpNnWdeI U1/sgXsWyJr4SJyF6PwJU9j/IEzgy+lOEQQH2y6I6GI/ZnFpQQaRMigTTU0ghDfF 5F/99h6kByyRNkws1Swc34+k0Rks0C6dNFGe4yKEMMlSQWhdZk16w4VX0amnUuDJ N6m2ZLQvZieNokzR+0gw6CW5EL9cZgWm6IKffkerUbHTbILEvYGkmdEAExZxjuCq 1KGDcZD0fITCTNsH35I2Atu8cLd+scM5tgiIwKZdGJQcTcfRv0UHshRyLeUy5WZm onnKHdhV2VH/p3SDbmC0ND3V6jwXEktLYLjcBigtjH1/IgiVy+8prJCzCoFmWwGq yy+H+b5XuLFogPCyDI/6CcqryL2/xhCvKgge5o9u+T3PmGo2QgX+uHhSN+54Uyka fEJ8PeSnd0hM+Q52k/5m1iL1FmT6O6B5LWV80mPxWtt5G0ffIUseW9oCJBzg2Ezn Bh1lCP97Of/Ggrkrf17hZ6okBNVWMis84SxEl/tmbuYp/YVkPnAxlyzfrptei7UH +9iTBo4wu8PR9RnlT4ON3yY7dIXqMubgSHduMKhE+24N9q+PVYLWwRm+UYUXELzL utude0N9NcYwrfaK+e+u =s0F6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nRfm25bcpdRU9h03mGUKLecPJ8fbcgASe-- From unknown Sat Jun 21 10:15:43 2025 Received: (at fakecontrol) by fakecontrolmessage; To: internal_control@debbugs.gnu.org From: Debbugs Internal Request Subject: Internal Control Message-Id: bug archived. Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 12:24:05 +0000 User-Agent: Fakemail v42.6.9 # This is a fake control message. # # The action: # bug archived. thanks # This fakemail brought to you by your local debbugs # administrator