Re: Uninformative comment in files.el

[David Kastrup]

martin rudalics <address@hidden> writes:

>>>I don't think that's true.  Any package that depends on overlays to
>>>correctly survive reverting won't work anyway.  Reverting the buffer
>>>will move the overlay bounds out, at least to cover all the changed
>>>text in the file.  That would break them.
>>
>>
>> Maybe it would.  Or maybe the package knows how to deal with that (it
>> wants the overlay to cover the whole buffer, for instance, and sets the
>> marker's advance-after property appropriately) or it just needs to keep
>> the overlay-buffer info to know in which buffer is the overlay.
>
> We could introduce another overlay property, `keep-when-revert-buffer'
> if removing overlays shall be the default, `remove-when-revert-buffer'
> otherwise.

Well, it may need to be reseated.  So maybe it might be smarter to have
something like a property 'revert-buffer-functions (defaults to
delete-overlay but could be set to nil instead or to other values).  I
am fuzzy about when to call it and with which arguments.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum