Re: Changes committed gnus/lisp (ChangeLog gnus-art.el)

Re: Changes committed gnus/lisp (ChangeLog gnus-art.el)

[Romain Francoise]

"Didier Verna" <didier@lrde.epita.fr> writes:

> -	because I just could't understand how to quote the list properly. 
> +	because I just could't understand how to quote the list properly.
                           ^^^

If you're removing whitespace (which you probably shouldn't without
prior coordination), please also fix this kind of thing.  And at the
very least, use separate commits for code and whitespace, otherwise
tracking changes becomes a real nightmare.

Thanks,

-- 
Romain Francoise <romain@orebokech.com> | Don't forget to breathe, and
it's a miracle -- http://orebokech.com/ | pay before you leave.

Re: Changes committed gnus/lisp (ChangeLog gnus-art.el)

[Didier Verna]

Romain Francoise <romain@orebokech.com> wrote:

> "Didier Verna" <didier@lrde.epita.fr> writes:
>
>> -	because I just could't understand how to quote the list properly. 
>> +	because I just could't understand how to quote the list properly.

> please also fix this kind of thing. 

        ??? I don't know where you got that from. I did not write this, so I
don't see how I could fix it. Besides, I can't find a trace of the message
you're replying to on ding@.


> If you're removing whitespace (which you probably shouldn't without
> prior coordination),

        ??? ??? It's been *years* that whitespace auto-removing is the way to
go. Admitedly, it's been a while since my last commit to gnus, but this has
never been a problem before and I don't see why it should be one now. Or
things got really *that* bad since I took some distance from the project ?


> And at the very least, use separate commits for code and whitespace,
> otherwise tracking changes becomes a real nightmare.

        You have got to be kidding me right ??

Hmmm, ok. I see where the original message comes from. It's on gnus.commits. 
So maybe I should subscribe to this. Look. There should *never* be any
trailing whitespace in source files. If there are some, then the concerned
committers are wrong. Not me. Personally, I never see any whitespace
difference in diff's. Not even in cvs diff's (that explains why I did not
understand your complain about the typo on top of the message). So maybe you
should just learn how to use -t -b -B -w.

BTW, the messages on gnus.commits should also avoid displaying whitespace
differences. And something else: please don't mail me directly when also
posting to ding@. I'm on it. This would not happen if the commit messages did
not appear as being sent by me (because I did *not* send it) but by the cvs
daemon. And what's more using the wrong address[1] (@lrde.epita.fr) because my
patch originates from @xemacs.org.

Geeze, some things *are* broken :-(



Footnotes: 
[1]  I don't know where the cvs daemon got that address from. The ssh key
maybe ?

-- 
Didier Verna, didier@lrde.epita.fr, http://www.lrde.epita.fr/~didier

EPITA / LRDE, 14-16 rue Voltaire   Tel.+33 (1) 44 08 01 85
94276 Le Kremlin-Bicêtre, France   Fax.+33 (1) 53 14 59 22   didier@xemacs.org

Re: Changes committed gnus/lisp (ChangeLog gnus-art.el)

[Romain Francoise]

Didier Verna <didier@xemacs.org> writes:

> Look. There should *never* be any trailing whitespace in source
> files. If there are some, then the concerned committers are wrong. Not
> me.

I couldn't agree more, but you're missing the point.

> Personally, I never see any whitespace difference in diff's. Not even
> in cvs diff's (that explains why I did not understand your complain
> about the typo on top of the message).

Whether or not you choose to see it, deleting it does change the file
and makes it harder to track changes, creates unnecessary conflicts when
branching, etc.

-- 
Romain Francoise <romain@orebokech.com> | Sometimes I don't know where
it's a miracle -- http://orebokech.com/ | this dirty road is taking me,
                                        | sometimes I can't even see
                                        | the reason why.

Faces of the wrong order (was Re: Changes committed gnus/lisp (ChangeLog gnus-art.el))

[Katsumi Yamaoka]

>>>>> In <E1DneB5-0007RY-00@quimby.gnus.org> Didier Verna wrote:

> +2005-06-29  Didier Verna  <didier@xemacs.org>
> +
> +	* gnus-art.el (article-display-face): display faces in correct
> +	order.
> +

I don't think you corrected the order.  This article contains
three Faces and three X-Faces in order of Face-1, Face-2,
Face-3, X-Face-1, X-Face-2 and X-Face-3 in the header.  WDYT?

I made a change before as follows.

2004-03-25  Katsumi Yamaoka  <yamaoka@jpl.org>

	* gnus-art.el (article-display-face): Display Faces in the same
	order as X-Faces.

Re: Faces of the wrong order

[Didier Verna]

Katsumi Yamaoka <yamaoka@jpl.org> wrote:

> I don't think you corrected the order. This article contains three Faces and
> three X-Faces in order of Face-1, Face-2, Face-3, X-Face-1, X-Face-2 and
> X-Face-3 in the header. WDYT?

        Sorry, I can't see them right now, I'm on a tty (who wants to hack
konsole to display the faces by modifying the background pixmap ? :-)

        However, I'm suspicious about your own order of face insertion. This
actually fixed a problem for me, and if you look at the code of
article-display[-x]-face, you'll see that previously, the faces and x-faces
lists were built in a different order. So my patch actually builds these lists
in the same order now (admitedly, in the opposite order from insertion in the
message, but AFAICR that was the case when this feature was first
implemented).

So, I'm not strongly opposed to revert the face order again (although I
believe that would break old code like mine), but then, the x-face order
should also be reverted in order to stay consistent.


-- 
Didier Verna, didier@lrde.epita.fr, http://www.lrde.epita.fr/~didier

EPITA / LRDE, 14-16 rue Voltaire   Tel.+33 (1) 44 08 01 85
94276 Le Kremlin-Bicêtre, France   Fax.+33 (1) 53 14 59 22   didier@xemacs.org

Re: Faces of the wrong order

[Katsumi Yamaoka]

>>>>> In <muxr7ekwx3g.fsf@uzeb.lrde.epita.fr> Didier Verna wrote:

> Katsumi Yamaoka <yamaoka@jpl.org> wrote:

>> I don't think you corrected the order. This article contains three Faces and
>> three X-Faces in order of Face-1, Face-2, Face-3, X-Face-1, X-Face-2 and
>> X-Face-3 in the header. WDYT?

>         Sorry, I can't see them right now, I'm on a tty (who wants to hack
> konsole to display the faces by modifying the background pixmap ? :-)

>         However, I'm suspicious about your own order of face insertion. This
> actually fixed a problem for me, and if you look at the code of
> article-display[-x]-face, you'll see that previously, the faces and x-faces
> lists were built in a different order. So my patch actually builds these lists
> in the same order now (admitedly, in the opposite order from insertion in the
> message, but AFAICR that was the case when this feature was first
> implemented).

> So, I'm not strongly opposed to revert the face order again (although I
> believe that would break old code like mine), but then, the x-face order
> should also be reverted in order to stay consistent.

I realized the cause is that you are using XEmacs but I'm using
Emacs normally.  I'll look for the proper way to fix the problem...

Re: Faces of the wrong order

[Katsumi Yamaoka]

>>>>> In <b9ybr5on28a.fsf@jpl.org> Katsumi Yamaoka wrote:

> I realized the cause is that you are using XEmacs but I'm using
> Emacs normally.  I'll look for the proper way to fix the problem...

Fixed.  Please test.

Re: Faces of the wrong order

[Adam Sjøgren]

On Thu, 30 Jun 2005 12:18:05 +0900, Katsumi wrote:

>>>>>> In <b9ybr5on28a.fsf@jpl.org> Katsumi Yamaoka wrote:

>> I realized the cause is that you are using XEmacs but I'm using
>> Emacs normally.  I'll look for the proper way to fix the problem...

> Fixed.  Please test.

Your test-article (<E1DneB5-0007RY-00@quimby.gnus.org>) displays Face
1, Face 2, Face 3, X-Face 1, X-Face 2, X-Face 3 in my XEmacs, now -
works great.

(XEmacs 21.4 (patch 17), Gnus from cvs some minutes ago).


  Best regards,

-- 
 "Lawrence of Suburbia                                        Adam Sjøgren
  Real life is murder"                                   asjo@koldfront.dk

Re: Faces of the wrong order

[Didier Verna]

Katsumi Yamaoka <yamaoka@jpl.org> wrote:

> I don't think you corrected the order. This article contains three Faces and
> three X-Faces in order of Face-1, Face-2, Face-3, X-Face-1, X-Face-2 and
> X-Face-3 in the header. WDYT?

        Displayed correctly for me after my patch, as you guessed. But also
correct with your latest round, so I guess the problem is fixed for both of
us. Out of curiosity, what's that difference between GNU Emacs and XEmacs ?

-- 
Didier Verna, didier@lrde.epita.fr, http://www.lrde.epita.fr/~didier

EPITA / LRDE, 14-16 rue Voltaire   Tel.+33 (1) 44 08 01 85
94276 Le Kremlin-Bicêtre, France   Fax.+33 (1) 53 14 59 22   didier@xemacs.org

Re: Faces of the wrong order

[Katsumi Yamaoka]

>>>>> In <muxacl6vbml.fsf@uzeb.lrde.epita.fr>
>>>>>	Didier Verna <didier@lrde.epita.fr> wrote:

> Out of curiosity, what's that difference between GNU Emacs and XEmacs ?

Emacs uses an non-zero length string per Face (each string has a
text property which displays a Face).  Two or more faces are
displayed in order of those strings.

OTOH, XEmacs uses extents; any number of extents can be put on
the same place.  The display order of them depends on the extent
type (begin-glyph or end-glyph) and the order of which they are
placed.

The true cause of that problem was that the places where strings
are put in the buffer was wrong in Emacs.  So, your fix was quite
right but a real bug was actualized again in Emacs.