GNU bug report logs - #64724
30.0.50; Inconsistency between manual, comments in the code, and implementation of point adjustment

Previous Next

Full log

Message #8 received at 64724 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Ihor Radchenko <yantar92 <at> posteo.net>,
 Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
Cc: 64724 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#64724: 30.0.50;
 Inconsistency between manual, comments in the code, and
 implementation of point adjustment
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2023 19:43:21 +0300

> From: Ihor Radchenko <yantar92 <at> posteo.net>
> Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2023 07:02:21 +0000
> 
> This is a followup of https://orgmode.org/list/87ilag1pth.fsf <at> localhost
> 
> We recently ran into some subtleties of point adjustment near invisible
> regions with sticky 'invisible property.
> 
> The actual code in `set_point_both' makes sure to move point across
> invisible sticky region if point happens to end up right before front
> sticky invisible or right after rear sticky invisible region.
> 
> However, 22.6 Adjusting Point After Commands does not mention this
> scenario.
> 
> Further, `set_point_both' contains the following comments:
> 
> 	  /* If the preceding character is both intangible and invisible,
> 	     and the invisible property is `rear-sticky', perturb it so
> 	     that the search starts one character earlier -- this ensures
> 	     that point can never move to the end of an invisible/
> 	     intangible/rear-sticky region.  */
> 	  charpos = adjust_for_invis_intang (charpos, -1, -1, 1);
>           <...>
>       	  /* If the following character is both intangible and invisible,
> 	     and the invisible property is `front-sticky', perturb it so
> 	     that the search starts one character later -- this ensures
> 	     that point can never move to the beginning of an
> 	     invisible/intangible/front-sticky region.  */
> 	  charpos = adjust_for_invis_intang (charpos, 0, 1, 1);
> 
> However, 'intanglible text property is, in fact, not necessary to
> trigger the adjustment.
> 
> May you (1) document this behaviour in the manual; (2) clarify what's up
> with intanglible.

I think you confuse two different point-adjustment behaviors.  What
the ELisp manual describes is the one implemented in
adjust_point_for_property and the code which calls it from
command_loop_1.  set_point_both does a different job for different
situations, AFAIU.

If you ignore set_point_both, what exactly is wrong about that short
section in the manual?

Adding Stefan, in case he has comments.

Previous Next

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