Re: Eglot "inlay hints" landed

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: João Távora <joaotavora@gmail.com>
> Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2023 10:42:26 +0000
> Cc: Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>, dalal.chinmay.0101@gmail.com, 
>       emacs-devel@gnu.org, dimitri@belopopsky.com, luangruo@yahoo.com
> 
> On Fri, Feb 24, 2023 at 7:35 AM Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
> >
> > If a jit-lock client is smart enough, it should itself install an
> > after-change function to remove the 'fontified property from the
> > portions of buffer text affected by a change that are before the first
> > changed position (or maybe even in other buffers).
> 
> Thanks, I was going to ask about that. I suppose this is how one
> marks sections of a buffer "dirty" or invalidatest them so that
> jit-lock knows it must run over them again when it sees fit.
> 
> If it works with other buffers as well, it might provide an
> elegant solution to the "A affects B" scenario we discussed
> earlier.

I don't see why it wouldn't work.  jit-lock relies on the 'fontified'
property to know which part(s) of buffer text need (re-)fontification
when they are about to be shown on display.  So any portion of buffer
text where this property is nil will cause jit-lock to call
fontification-functions on that part.