[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#11095: [PATCH] Re: bug#11095: 24.0.94; hi-lock-face-buffer/unhighlig
From: |
Stefan Monnier |
Subject: |
bug#11095: [PATCH] Re: bug#11095: 24.0.94; hi-lock-face-buffer/unhighlight-regexp': Augment? |
Date: |
Fri, 07 Dec 2012 11:55:54 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) |
> This is the behaviour I am expecting. This is what I
> circulated in etc/NEWS entry.
> *** Unhighlighting command (`hi-lock-unface-buffer') now un-highlights
> text at point. When called interactively with C-u, removes all
> highlighting in current buffer.
Oh, right, I had forgotten about that. Indeed, the default regexp
choice had a bug and a misfeature. Should be fixed now.
> We seem to be talking too much but not taking a moment to understand to
> each other.
I generally have many conversions in flight at the same time, so it
really helps if you repeat more of the context. E.g. making it clear
whether you're talking about a regression, an old bug, a request for
a new feature, a reminder for god-knows-what, ...
> You reply, but with no effort on your part to understand what I
> am saying or showing you.
I'm sorry you feel I'm not making enough efforts. Maintaining Emacs
takes a lot of time, so please bear with me and try to help me
understand faster by giving me as many details as possible.
For example, often sending a short patch of code is a good way forward,
or a *precise* recipe telling what happens and what should have happened
instead (I assure you I won't be offended even if some parts are too
obvious).
Stefan
- bug#11095: [PATCH] Re: bug#11095: 24.0.94; hi-lock-face-buffer/unhighlight-regexp': Augment?, (continued)
- bug#11095: [PATCH] Re: bug#11095: 24.0.94; hi-lock-face-buffer/unhighlight-regexp': Augment?, Jambunathan K, 2012/12/06
- bug#11095: [PATCH] Re: bug#11095: 24.0.94; hi-lock-face-buffer/unhighlight-regexp': Augment?, Jambunathan K, 2012/12/06
- bug#11095: [PATCH] Re: bug#11095: 24.0.94; hi-lock-face-buffer/unhighlight-regexp': Augment?, Stefan Monnier, 2012/12/06
- bug#11095: [PATCH] Re: bug#11095: 24.0.94; hi-lock-face-buffer/unhighlight-regexp': Augment?, Drew Adams, 2012/12/06
- bug#11095: [PATCH] Re: bug#11095: 24.0.94; hi-lock-face-buffer/unhighlight-regexp': Augment?, Jambunathan K, 2012/12/06
- bug#11095: [PATCH] Re: bug#11095: 24.0.94; hi-lock-face-buffer/unhighlight-regexp': Augment?, Stefan Monnier, 2012/12/06
- bug#11095: [PATCH] Re: bug#11095: 24.0.94; hi-lock-face-buffer/unhighlight-regexp': Augment?, Jambunathan K, 2012/12/06
- bug#11095: [PATCH] Re: bug#11095: 24.0.94; hi-lock-face-buffer/unhighlight-regexp': Augment?, Stefan Monnier, 2012/12/06
- bug#11095: [PATCH] Re: bug#11095: 24.0.94; hi-lock-face-buffer/unhighlight-regexp': Augment?, Jambunathan K, 2012/12/06
- bug#11095: [PATCH] Re: bug#11095: 24.0.94; hi-lock-face-buffer/unhighlight-regexp': Augment?,
Stefan Monnier <=
- bug#11095: [PATCH] Re: bug#11095: 24.0.94; hi-lock-face-buffer/unhighlight-regexp': Augment?, Jambunathan K, 2012/12/08
- bug#11095: [PATCH] Re: bug#11095: 24.0.94; hi-lock-face-buffer/unhighlight-regexp': Augment?, Jambunathan K, 2012/12/09
- bug#11095: [PATCH] Re: bug#11095: 24.0.94; hi-lock-face-buffer/unhighlight-regexp': Augment?, Stefan Monnier, 2012/12/10
- bug#11095: [PATCH] Re: bug#11095: 24.0.94; hi-lock-face-buffer/unhighlight-regexp': Augment?, Jambunathan K, 2012/12/10
- bug#11095: [PATCH] Re: bug#11095: 24.0.94; hi-lock-face-buffer/unhighlight-regexp': Augment?, Stefan Monnier, 2012/12/10