Re: gutter garbage insanity
At 08:22 PM 4/30/00 -0700, Ben Wing wrote:
andy, there's something you're just not getting: blaming
packages because
they
do something that tickles a gutter bug is just not kosher. your
mindset
needs
to shift from "other packages can't do this or that or the
other thing too
I am, admittedly, trying to wind you up. The gutter code does work (better
to be correct than fast) and in fact I made a lot of changes not so long
ago so that lazy-lock works passably. Its just how well it works.
Generating lots of garbage its not a robusticty issue (in this instance
IMHO) its an optimization issue.
So I agree with you up to a point.
frequently" to "the gutter code needs to be robust enough
that other packages
can do what they want". everything else in xemacs works this way. if the
I sort of agree with this (in the sense its a desirable goal), but I don't
believe this necessarily works out in practice. Package authors introduce
lots of little tweaks to make things behave sensibly on a particular
versions of XEmacs.
gutter code is going to remain in xemacs, it needs to work this way
too.
*everyone* calls set-buffer. this is a totally standard function.
Sure. And I fixed things so that it will actually work as intended. What
everyone doesn't do is call set-buffer literally a thousand times a second.
Anyway, you appear to have commited a fix that does it for you. So if
you're happy I'm happy too.
andy
--------------------------------------------------------------
Dr Andy Piper
Principal Consultant, BEA Systems Ltd