Subject: Re: bug#35797: 26.2; Adaptive Wrap does not respect Whitespace Mode faces

From: Andrew T <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 May 2019 13:27:10 -0700

> I think there's a misunderstanding here, due to the multitude of
> faces and some implicit expectations that were never explicitly
> described. Would you please describe what you expected to see in this
> case, in terms of the appearance of the whitespace characters of
> wrap-prefix?

For space characters, I only care if it's a *trailing* space -- since
that is important for certain simplified markup languages like Pug and
Markdown, and cleaning up trailing spaces is often required in
different code style guides -- or if it's a "hard" (non-breaking)
space.

I want normal spaces to be *invisible*, as long as they appear between
words, or at the beginning of indented lines.

The Adaptive Wrap prefix shows all those dots representing spaces. I
assume it's not using hard spaces, because that would be weird. And
these spaces are added to the beginning of the soft-wrapped lines, not
the end, so they aren't really trailing spaces either, right? In any
case, the dots are not *colored* as if they were either hard or
trailing spaces; the dots in the wrap prefix are instead rendered in
the buffer default colors, for some reason.

So it seems to me that those dots should be invisible, just like they
would be if I hard-wrapped the lines, since hard-wrapping is the
behavior Adaptive Wrap tries to simulate in its display.

On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 9:09 PM Eli Zaretskii <[email-masked]> wrote:
>
> > From: Andrew T <[email-masked]>
> > Date: Wed, 22 May 2019 13:13:27 -0700
> > Cc: Stephen Berman <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
> >
> > I'm having a hard time trying to do my original bug reproduction
> > starting from the `emacs -Q` command, because GNU ELPA keeps timing
> > out or something. `M-x package-refresh-contents` reports "Failed to
> > download ‘gnu’ archive." Not sure if my network is acting screwy or if
> > the ELPA server is down. `M-x package-list` actually says
> > adaptive-wrap 0.7 is already installed(??) even though it's not
> > included with the Emacs packages installed from Fedora -- yet the
> > `adaptive-wrap-prefix-mode` command is unavailable. So at the moment,
> > I can't test your suggestion of setting the whitespace-line face
> > background, at least not starting from a pristine environment.
>
> You don't need to install anything, just load adaptive-wrap.el
> manually with "M-x load-file", after downloading the file to your
> system.
>
> > ...However, the default colors for the `whitespace-line` face is sort
> > of a purple foreground on dark gray background, while in the
> > screenshots from my previous test (second image at
> > <https://imgur.com/a/znbU0s3>), the wrap prefix is black on white --
> > same as the buffer default colors for text that hasn't yet gotten any
> > syntax or other highlighting.
>
> I think there's a misunderstanding here, due to the multitude of faces
> and some implicit expectations that were never explicitly described.
> Would you please describe what you expected to see in this case, in
> terms of the appearance of the whitespace characters of wrap-prefix?
> The whitespace characters elsewhere in the display you show have 2
> different appearances: one in the initial comment of the *scratch*
> buffer, the other in the long line you typed.  Which one of them did
> you expect to see in the wrap-prefix?  Or maybe you expected to see
> something that is neither one?  Please state the expectations as
> clearly and unambiguously as you possible can, okay?
>
> > And in my actual configuration (the third image in the Imgur album),
> > it's the same behavior, except there the default colors are white on
> > very dark gray. I actually have Whitespace Mode configured *not* to do
> > highlighting for long lines anyway. In Customize, under the Whitespace
> > Style options, both of the "(Face) Lines" checkboxes are unchecked.
>
> Likewise, in this last use case: please describe your expectations.
>
> Thanks.