From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rasmus Subject: Re: bug#22399: org-mode fontification Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 20:05:32 +0100 Message-ID: <871t9d4cg3.fsf@gmx.us> References: <87oacjng36.fsf@russet.org.uk> <87ziw36khb.fsf@gmx.us> <87a8o2zrtm.fsf@russet.org.uk> <87bn8i7mha.fsf@gmx.us> <87d1syvgc7.fsf@kyleam.com> <8737tu13la.fsf__5430.1016768024$1453185240$gmane$org@kyleam.com> <87d1sy54vt.fsf@gmx.us> <87wpr5zirr.fsf@kyleam.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41025) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aLbb8-0007n4-Qf for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 14:05:47 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aLbb3-0007n1-Px for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 14:05:46 -0500 Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:38889) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aLbb3-0007m1-JJ for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 14:05:41 -0500 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1aLbaz-00024g-Iz for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 20:05:37 +0100 Received: from 62.80.108.10 ([62.80.108.10]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 20:05:37 +0100 Received: from rasmus by 62.80.108.10 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 20:05:37 +0100 List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Cc: 22399@debbugs.gnu.org Hi Kyle, Kyle Meyer writes: >> I just have one concern, which is pretty theoretical. Isn’t it bad to >> define the alias to be font-lock-ensure since this is an existing function >> and people would have clear expectations of what they are calling? I >> realize that there’s no Emacs-25 that will not have this function (which >> is why it’s very theoretical). > > I agree, but, like you, I'm not sure it will matter in practice. Again, > this was the solution that was already in Org's repo at the time I > backported Emacs's 6711a21f1. However, it's easy enough to switch to > using an org-font-lock-ensure variant that avoids these issues, so I > will do that (in an updated patch and on Org's maint). Thanks. Kyle Meyer writes: >> However, it's easy enough to switch to using an org-font-lock-ensure >> variant that avoids these issues, so I will do that (in an updated >> patch and on Org's maint). > > I've attached updated patches against emacs-25. If these are applied to > the Emacs repo, I'll backport the new font-lock-ensure alias to Org's > maint. Looks good, thanks. Rasmus -- Er du tosset for noge' lårt!