X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#69941: 30.0.50; Faulty fontification of radio button widgets
Resent-From: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2024 15:01:01 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.69941.B.17111196116159 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: report 69941
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords:
To: 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Debbugs-Original-To: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Received: via spool by submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B.17111196116159
(code B ref -1); Fri, 22 Mar 2024 15:01:01 +0000
Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 22 Mar 2024 15:00:11 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58670 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1rngNO-0001bG-RX
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 22 Mar 2024 11:00:11 -0400
Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:60984)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <stephen.berman@HIDDEN>) id 1rngNK-0001Xf-E8
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 22 Mar 2024 11:00:09 -0400
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10])
by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <stephen.berman@HIDDEN>)
id 1rng9T-0004sX-3B
for bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN; Fri, 22 Mar 2024 10:45:49 -0400
Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.19])
by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <stephen.berman@HIDDEN>)
id 1rng9R-0003jY-4T
for bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN; Fri, 22 Mar 2024 10:45:46 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmx.net;
s=s31663417; t=1711118743; x=1711723543; i=stephen.berman@HIDDEN;
bh=9HnrS87+V75EG/mi/0+z2oI2w28pTBuld2yM4V3Qox8=;
h=X-UI-Sender-Class:From:To:Subject:Date;
b=Gft1R80KTQiBRe311sniDocD6FJpZZmqzmrRE6nBdsUiLqe6T1KHiVVOJ5s0iXML
s/nxxR+qCX3Uq85anL0JHbHzyOQazmodky27Uj0bXus4MBy9YMMlM+m6eCiRKVdYI
HCXI6k6t7BOwQDRpMCLzOx+dL4r9iqWZyTzXKbK/2rH0+SOzQkECbGhdOEt4UH3en
6yxRj20vimXxfmRVnBwU7fLaUOlIMMNfBj1wVqKs7Dg+bDgNsdYMftnV4Y7Sw8f6O
jv+W2dyxnV8lapJg6/S1Lmp8iN5xFhS924Li+XRUbAVpfRPDT8D/bWLSTsAj9mdXp
+Ptj3GMRBr3RylWSPA==
X-UI-Sender-Class: 724b4f7f-cbec-4199-ad4e-598c01a50d3a
Received: from strobelfs2 ([88.130.50.228]) by mail.gmx.net (mrgmx004
[212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1N8ob6-1qj5VJ1ft8-015sjs for
<bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN>; Fri, 22 Mar 2024 15:45:43 +0100
From: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN>
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2024 15:45:42 +0100
Message-ID: <87h6gynx49.fsf@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=-=-="
X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:r3Wjr09sdLqkknsiYCL5cGFHCX/DGR3vBs470dPAA5Xys7FM1tx
aBsERhAzhM8KTAtbPuUaotMhc1HLikZ4XOH2YNIm9mI3sIu9AIhnpEowLox4ybrqU4aw5hn
imvdCmtcenBR6UQYbh9I3gHQ5iGdjyGz8DDc6LrrrLakOICcJtAootRxdmnC9usQuVLmgCS
RnPB2AgGwskcNS+dg2sfw==
X-Spam-Flag: NO
UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:zOlArsquE3M=;+A0VjoyWeOC5R7oyOJRwiQ7mVao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Received-SPF: pass client-ip=212.227.15.19;
envelope-from=stephen.berman@HIDDEN; helo=mout.gmx.net
X-Spam_score_int: 5
X-Spam_score: 0.5
X-Spam_bar: /
X-Spam_report: (0.5 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001,
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001,
RCVD_IN_SBL_CSS=3.335, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001,
SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
X-Spam_action: no action
X-Spam-Score: 4.2 (++++)
X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org",
has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original
message has been attached to this so you can view it or label
similar future email. If you have any questions, see
the administrator of that system for details.
Content preview: 0. Save the following code (attached here to circumvent line
breaks added by the mail program) as widget-example.el: 1. emacs -Q -l
widget-example.el
2. M-x my-widget-example In the buffer "*My Widget Example*" it easy to see
(due to value of the widget-inactive face set in widget-example.el) that
the push-button widget "Activate" is inactive and the radio-button widgets
l [...] Content analysis details: (4.2 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
-2.3 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
medium trust [209.51.188.17 listed in list.dnswl.org]
3.6 RCVD_IN_SBL_CSS RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus SBL-CSS
[88.130.50.228 listed in zen.spamhaus.org]
1.0 SPF_SOFTFAIL SPF: sender does not match SPF record (softfail)
-0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail
provider (stephen.berman[at]gmx.net)
-0.0 T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE No description available.
2.0 SPOOFED_FREEMAIL No description available.
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: 1.2 (+)
X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org",
has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original
message has been attached to this so you can view it or label
similar future email. If you have any questions, see
the administrator of that system for details.
Content preview: 0. Save the following code (attached here to circumvent line
breaks added by the mail program) as widget-example.el: 1. emacs -Q -l widget-example.el
2. M-x my-widget-example In the buffer "*My Widget Example*" it easy to see
(due to value of the widget-inactive face set in widget-example.el) that
the push-button widget "Activate" is inactive and the radio-button widgets
l [...]
Content analysis details: (1.2 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
3.6 RCVD_IN_SBL_CSS RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus SBL-CSS
[88.130.50.228 listed in zen.spamhaus.org]
-2.3 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
medium trust
[209.51.188.17 listed in list.dnswl.org]
1.0 SPF_SOFTFAIL SPF: sender does not match SPF record (softfail)
-0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail
provider (stephen.berman[at]gmx.net)
-0.0 T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE No description available.
-1.0 MAILING_LIST_MULTI Multiple indicators imply a widely-seen list
manager
--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain
0. Save the following code (attached here to circumvent line breaks
added by the mail program) as widget-example.el:
--=-=-=
Content-Type: application/emacs-lisp
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=widget-example.el
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
(custom-set-faces '(widget-inactive ((t (:foreground "magenta"
:background "yellow")))))
(defvar my-radio-widget)
(defvar my-activate-button)
(defun my-widget-example ()
(interactive)
(switch-to-buffer "*My Widget Example*")
(kill-all-local-variables)
(let ((inhibit-read-only t))
(erase-buffer))
(remove-overlays)
(setq my-radio-widget
(widget-create 'radio-button-choice
:notify (lambda (widget &rest _)
(widget-apply widget :deactivate)
(widget-apply my-activate-button :activate))
'(item "One") '(item "Two")))
(setq my-activate-button
(widget-create 'push-button
:notify (lambda (widget &rest _)
(widget-value-set my-radio-widget "")
(widget-apply my-radio-widget :activate)
(widget-apply widget :deactivate))
"Activate"))
(widget-apply my-activate-button :deactivate)
(use-local-map widget-keymap)
(widget-setup))
--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain
1. emacs -Q -l widget-example.el
2. M-x my-widget-example
In the buffer "*My Widget Example*" it easy to see (due to value of the
widget-inactive face set in widget-example.el) that the push-button
widget "Activate" is inactive and the radio-button widgets labelled
"One" and "Two" are active (the buttons have the default face; that the
labels next to the buttons have the widget-inactive face may seem odd,
but that's not the bug I'm reporting here; I address that issue in a
separate bug report).
3. Press TAB (or S-TAB) twice to put point on the radio button "Two",
then press RET. As the fontification shows, now both radio buttons are
inactive (so pressing RET on either raises the error "Attempt to perform
action on inactive widget"), and the "Activate" button is now active.
After tabbing to the "Activate" button and pressing RET, the initial
state is restored, with the two radio buttons active and "Activate"
inactive.
4. Now tab up to the radio buttone "One" and press RET.
=> While radio button "Two" agains has the widget-inactive face, radio
button "One" (just the button, not its label) has the default face used
for active widgets, though it is in fact inactive (as pressing RET and
getting the corresponding error verifies).
5. Tab back to "Activate" and press RET, again restoring the initial
state. Now tab to radio button "Two" and press RET.
=> The fontification is the same as in step 4: radio button "Two" has
the widget-inactive face but radio button "One" has the default (active)
face, though it is again inactive. Repeatedly pressing either of the
radio buttons (after activating them), does not change the fontification
of "One" again.
The faulty fontification of radio button "One" also obtains if there is
just one radio button instead of two, and if there are more than two
radio buttons, it is only the first one that displays the odd
fontification (admittedly, I've only test up to three radio buttons).
I've tried to debug this and found that the problem seems to be due to
the sexp (set-marker-insertion-type from t) near the end of
widget-default-create, which advances the marker specified by the
widget's :from property. Changing t to nil fixes the faulty
fontification of the first radio button.
I investigated the history of this code, and while the value t for the
marker insertion type was used in the initial commit, it was changed to
nil in commit e0f956935, with the message "Insert new text at the :from
marker _after_ the marker, not before it." But 18 days later it was
changed back to t in commit 3bff434b8, that also added "Document need to
put some text before the %v escape in :format string" of editable-field
widgets. (I looked at the bug-gnu-emacs and emacs-devel mailing list
archives but found nothing relevant at the time just prior to these
commits.)
So evidently the advancing marker insertion type is needed for at least
some widgets, though it seems to be problematic for radio buttons. So I
tried to conditionalize the choice of t or nil on the type of the
widget. I used (not (eq 'radio-button (widget-type widget))), since the
argument `widget' of widget-default-create is, according to Edebug,
indeed radio-button, so negating the eq sexp returns nil, which I had
found to be the value of the marker insertion type that fixes the
fontification (however, I couldn't think of a way of limiting the
conditioning to only the first radio button, but in my testing so far
that lack doesn't appear to make a difference).
But in fact, using the negation of the value of the eq sexp results in
the same faulty fontification, while omitting the negation (as in the
attached patch), which yields the advancing insertion type t, gives the
correct fontification, just like using nil does. This makes no sense to
me, yet it is reliably reproducible. The only possible explanation that
occurs to me is that the bug is triggered elsewhere in the Emacs code
and somehow using the sexp that evaluates to t as the marker insertion
type affects that code, while using t itself does not (or rather, has
the opposite effect); but how that could be and where the culpable code
is, I don't know (as a guess, perhaps in the C code that adds faces, but
I don't know how to debug that). If anyone knows or has an idea what's
going on here, please communicate it. In the meantime I will continue
to use the widget library with the patch to see whether it has unwanted
consequences.
--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/x-patch
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=widget-default-create.diff
diff --git a/lisp/wid-edit.el b/lisp/wid-edit.el
index 172da3db1e0..c2cd48e1551 100644
--- a/lisp/wid-edit.el
+++ b/lisp/wid-edit.el
@@ -1733,8 +1733,9 @@ widget-default-create
(goto-char value-pos)
(widget-apply widget :value-create)))
(let ((from (point-min-marker))
- (to (point-max-marker)))
- (set-marker-insertion-type from t)
+ (to (point-max-marker))
+ (from-mit (eq 'radio-button (widget-type widget))))
+ (set-marker-insertion-type from from-mit)
(set-marker-insertion-type to nil)
(widget-put widget :from from)
(widget-put widget :to to)))
--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain
In GNU Emacs 30.0.50 (build 3, x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, GTK+ Version
3.24.38, cairo version 1.18.0) of 2024-03-22 built on strobelfs2
Repository revision: c1530a2e4973005633ebe00d447f1f3aa1200301
Repository branch: master
Windowing system distributor 'The X.Org Foundation', version 11.0.12101009
System Description: Linux From Scratch r12.0-112
Configured using:
'configure -C --with-xwidgets 'CFLAGS=-Og -g3'
PKG_CONFIG_PATH=/opt/qt5/lib/pkgconfig'
Configured features:
ACL CAIRO DBUS FREETYPE GIF GLIB GMP GNUTLS GPM GSETTINGS HARFBUZZ JPEG
JSON LCMS2 LIBSYSTEMD LIBXML2 MODULES NATIVE_COMP NOTIFY INOTIFY PDUMPER
PNG RSVG SECCOMP SOUND SQLITE3 THREADS TIFF TOOLKIT_SCROLL_BARS
TREE_SITTER WEBP X11 XDBE XIM XINPUT2 XPM XWIDGETS GTK3 ZLIB
--=-=-=--
Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.505 (Entity 5.505) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN From: help-debbugs@HIDDEN (GNU bug Tracking System) To: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN> Subject: bug#69941: Acknowledgement (30.0.50; Faulty fontification of radio button widgets) Message-ID: <handler.69941.B.17111196116159.ack <at> debbugs.gnu.org> References: <87h6gynx49.fsf@HIDDEN> X-Gnu-PR-Message: ack 69941 X-Gnu-PR-Package: emacs Reply-To: 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2024 15:01:02 +0000 Thank you for filing a new bug report with debbugs.gnu.org. This is an automatically generated reply to let you know your message has been received. Your message is being forwarded to the package maintainers and other interested parties for their attention; they will reply in due course. Your message has been sent to the package maintainer(s): bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN If you wish to submit further information on this problem, please send it to 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org. Please do not send mail to help-debbugs@HIDDEN unless you wish to report a problem with the Bug-tracking system. --=20 69941: https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=3D69941 GNU Bug Tracking System Contact help-debbugs@HIDDEN with problems
X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#69941: 30.0.50; Faulty fontification of radio button widgets
Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2024 15:34:01 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.69941.B69941.171112160312160 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 69941
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords:
To: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN>, Mauro Aranda <maurooaranda@HIDDEN>, Stefan Monnier <monnier@HIDDEN>
Cc: 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Received: via spool by 69941-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B69941.171112160312160
(code B ref 69941); Fri, 22 Mar 2024 15:34:01 +0000
Received: (at 69941) by debbugs.gnu.org; 22 Mar 2024 15:33:23 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60775 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1rngtW-0003A1-L7
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 22 Mar 2024 11:33:23 -0400
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:44454)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1rngtS-00039c-R3
for 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 22 Mar 2024 11:33:21 -0400
Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e])
by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>)
id 1rngsh-0006yQ-9S; Fri, 22 Mar 2024 11:32:32 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org;
s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date:
mime-version; bh=CwWyTKOhkdVoX0dYgPG2sqLJgcJdmQkXpXkm2UGOw9U=; b=b7YSS73UIMSW
YZ2XRzIPtf1bxpASUhlBRsQXOdZGNuzY+Ms/7KG9cySy1g4HBeN/hLv6Vn48dBbSIBixPBOUiNrMk
bGKdsfoiuN59Em/f4R+Oy2XukWencDjaszZ5jvmFIl8xdxYuteb+AnBBSmAvNJYJUb7FNgr0FVL7i
/vBpCWzVXbWooiDU7alBM+iJl9abeaQG5duBwlk+uXxbXumJEX/yhIjWA1t3ocaQc+zCGjJEInnTv
WGq6X4R8qnekTfSnjfKsnx2VoI6wsTmu3nnF0Ag3q8vz6RfnXtoyaQO+NQ8EUlR2HuI5LBO7jR8ZJ
4fONXp+6WEDxt+oJRjO4Xw==;
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2024 17:31:46 +0200
Message-Id: <865xxe1dwd.fsf@HIDDEN>
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
In-Reply-To: <87h6gynx49.fsf@HIDDEN> (bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN)
References: <87h6gynx49.fsf@HIDDEN>
X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---)
> Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2024 15:45:42 +0100
> From: Stephen Berman via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs,
> the Swiss army knife of text editors" <bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN>
>
> 0. Save the following code (attached here to circumvent line breaks
> added by the mail program) as widget-example.el:
>
> (custom-set-faces '(widget-inactive ((t (:foreground "magenta"
> :background "yellow")))))
>
> (defvar my-radio-widget)
> (defvar my-activate-button)
>
> (defun my-widget-example ()
> (interactive)
> (switch-to-buffer "*My Widget Example*")
> (kill-all-local-variables)
> (let ((inhibit-read-only t))
> (erase-buffer))
> (remove-overlays)
> (setq my-radio-widget
> (widget-create 'radio-button-choice
> :notify (lambda (widget &rest _)
> (widget-apply widget :deactivate)
> (widget-apply my-activate-button :activate))
> '(item "One") '(item "Two")))
> (setq my-activate-button
> (widget-create 'push-button
> :notify (lambda (widget &rest _)
> (widget-value-set my-radio-widget "")
> (widget-apply my-radio-widget :activate)
> (widget-apply widget :deactivate))
> "Activate"))
> (widget-apply my-activate-button :deactivate)
> (use-local-map widget-keymap)
> (widget-setup))
>
> 1. emacs -Q -l widget-example.el
> 2. M-x my-widget-example
>
> In the buffer "*My Widget Example*" it easy to see (due to value of the
> widget-inactive face set in widget-example.el) that the push-button
> widget "Activate" is inactive and the radio-button widgets labelled
> "One" and "Two" are active (the buttons have the default face; that the
> labels next to the buttons have the widget-inactive face may seem odd,
> but that's not the bug I'm reporting here; I address that issue in a
> separate bug report).
>
> 3. Press TAB (or S-TAB) twice to put point on the radio button "Two",
> then press RET. As the fontification shows, now both radio buttons are
> inactive (so pressing RET on either raises the error "Attempt to perform
> action on inactive widget"), and the "Activate" button is now active.
> After tabbing to the "Activate" button and pressing RET, the initial
> state is restored, with the two radio buttons active and "Activate"
> inactive.
>
> 4. Now tab up to the radio buttone "One" and press RET.
> => While radio button "Two" agains has the widget-inactive face, radio
> button "One" (just the button, not its label) has the default face used
> for active widgets, though it is in fact inactive (as pressing RET and
> getting the corresponding error verifies).
>
> 5. Tab back to "Activate" and press RET, again restoring the initial
> state. Now tab to radio button "Two" and press RET.
> => The fontification is the same as in step 4: radio button "Two" has
> the widget-inactive face but radio button "One" has the default (active)
> face, though it is again inactive. Repeatedly pressing either of the
> radio buttons (after activating them), does not change the fontification
> of "One" again.
>
>
> The faulty fontification of radio button "One" also obtains if there is
> just one radio button instead of two, and if there are more than two
> radio buttons, it is only the first one that displays the odd
> fontification (admittedly, I've only test up to three radio buttons).
>
> I've tried to debug this and found that the problem seems to be due to
> the sexp (set-marker-insertion-type from t) near the end of
> widget-default-create, which advances the marker specified by the
> widget's :from property. Changing t to nil fixes the faulty
> fontification of the first radio button.
>
> I investigated the history of this code, and while the value t for the
> marker insertion type was used in the initial commit, it was changed to
> nil in commit e0f956935, with the message "Insert new text at the :from
> marker _after_ the marker, not before it." But 18 days later it was
> changed back to t in commit 3bff434b8, that also added "Document need to
> put some text before the %v escape in :format string" of editable-field
> widgets. (I looked at the bug-gnu-emacs and emacs-devel mailing list
> archives but found nothing relevant at the time just prior to these
> commits.)
>
> So evidently the advancing marker insertion type is needed for at least
> some widgets, though it seems to be problematic for radio buttons. So I
> tried to conditionalize the choice of t or nil on the type of the
> widget. I used (not (eq 'radio-button (widget-type widget))), since the
> argument `widget' of widget-default-create is, according to Edebug,
> indeed radio-button, so negating the eq sexp returns nil, which I had
> found to be the value of the marker insertion type that fixes the
> fontification (however, I couldn't think of a way of limiting the
> conditioning to only the first radio button, but in my testing so far
> that lack doesn't appear to make a difference).
>
> But in fact, using the negation of the value of the eq sexp results in
> the same faulty fontification, while omitting the negation (as in the
> attached patch), which yields the advancing insertion type t, gives the
> correct fontification, just like using nil does. This makes no sense to
> me, yet it is reliably reproducible. The only possible explanation that
> occurs to me is that the bug is triggered elsewhere in the Emacs code
> and somehow using the sexp that evaluates to t as the marker insertion
> type affects that code, while using t itself does not (or rather, has
> the opposite effect); but how that could be and where the culpable code
> is, I don't know (as a guess, perhaps in the C code that adds faces, but
> I don't know how to debug that). If anyone knows or has an idea what's
> going on here, please communicate it. In the meantime I will continue
> to use the widget library with the patch to see whether it has unwanted
> consequences.
>
> diff --git a/lisp/wid-edit.el b/lisp/wid-edit.el
> index 172da3db1e0..c2cd48e1551 100644
> --- a/lisp/wid-edit.el
> +++ b/lisp/wid-edit.el
> @@ -1733,8 +1733,9 @@ widget-default-create
> (goto-char value-pos)
> (widget-apply widget :value-create)))
> (let ((from (point-min-marker))
> - (to (point-max-marker)))
> - (set-marker-insertion-type from t)
> + (to (point-max-marker))
> + (from-mit (eq 'radio-button (widget-type widget))))
> + (set-marker-insertion-type from from-mit)
> (set-marker-insertion-type to nil)
> (widget-put widget :from from)
> (widget-put widget :to to)))
>
Mauro and Stefan, any comments or suggestions?
X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#69941: 30.0.50; Faulty fontification of radio button widgets
Resent-From: Mauro Aranda <maurooaranda@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2024 21:26:02 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.69941.B69941.171122912018123 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 69941
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords:
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>, Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN>
Cc: 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Stefan Monnier <monnier@HIDDEN>
Received: via spool by 69941-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B69941.171122912018123
(code B ref 69941); Sat, 23 Mar 2024 21:26:02 +0000
Received: (at 69941) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Mar 2024 21:25:20 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54751 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1ro8rf-0004iF-W5
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 23 Mar 2024 17:25:20 -0400
Received: from mail-oi1-f171.google.com ([209.85.167.171]:44511)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <maurooaranda@HIDDEN>) id 1ro8SA-0003dr-VN
for 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 23 Mar 2024 16:58:59 -0400
Received: by mail-oi1-f171.google.com with SMTP id
5614622812f47-3c3880cd471so1846286b6e.1
for <69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Sat, 23 Mar 2024 13:58:17 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1711227432; x=1711832232; darn=debbugs.gnu.org;
h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:content-language
:references:cc:to:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id
:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
bh=WBS1uRNuEGR3GDIMTiO4qKAMOkVUa/jV745k82v7gac=;
b=h1rL+qOnTY6aeiFSkBPJF8DaMt+6W+t9TT4GgOLC3erf/XHfYf0tKlW0dsDrqHoA6P
9JK94S8jWhXKrb8AzEs1ssmdFwJt/WcMKqyoKxKjf5rz+qzj9amO1SyTRu5px/6PuuzP
p4uVxI9KxKH7YQ88lEm312sex4D5zZN5YtFvOG1LUBUedPfE8wSx1SiI93mGUj+AhyY0
uXhVlok9TWdXRk/HiE6qX802zk95rfBCB/iQsCvSnp9z5XMoahKG7xS0fk8T3jwOD5dF
cYou5Jslhiu6LKJ3ogHR1m0bP63eZccQVXlyYJ/LmIeCyu3Bub1ok0QPxHoCADk7/5pw
ftgw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1711227432; x=1711832232;
h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:content-language
:references:cc:to:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id
:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
bh=WBS1uRNuEGR3GDIMTiO4qKAMOkVUa/jV745k82v7gac=;
b=LorOC6cMRbijhSxzK0lNfsliGjOiCRb0e1IUKd6g1Lb7MIPKG8EPTRqbkmdWU65nXY
mw75yGD0DLXtgfpoyLKpkZFkULcBmM1MXxPrX4ds1dVmAh8DpCb2FW1FFlktIeyS6IxN
q4IJXJEi5Kk/yn9+1IoPzJQ1VfKIj9J94MyMv2sKKxMII8IKEopYzlw6+SGdk9SnuQ1G
yaUI0ZHOXnnUP1fjmYHy/eEI9zK3qwQ2/mxRuSvC4GcXJTWAo6zQwr0mHr0tgrAr1ObY
wHBmJ2AyjlxxSCXMM/vrGenUvyrZaTGJ4sqNkStXaENAGqtgH/snrIBAR5khkTGNnOcs
QTTw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yy0VvxntbnU25UNOH72s6kIn8zLMDncXC0EE4uo7VUOzi2blYZw
ctKJsvu3DIBSAbWxfZ8WjAOBtbOVDw7dMdhXBDaDBqdEt/IZ6a0y5Q2+wB+7
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHjOFBKJbJ9DWY2Da5rf9u+Mv+kMW+MZyISwdIJ+RmRbiARMi19rdEK4OTDg+FKtYuvQ3EGeA==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:1296:b0:2a0:38b5:bdc6 with SMTP id
fw22-20020a17090b129600b002a038b5bdc6mr2384246pjb.22.1711226998611;
Sat, 23 Mar 2024 13:49:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.0.234] ([181.228.33.6])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
nn11-20020a17090b38cb00b0029b32b85d3dsm7481628pjb.29.2024.03.23.13.49.56
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128);
Sat, 23 Mar 2024 13:49:58 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <51c20b56-4b82-4f5c-9559-cdbd0146df22@HIDDEN>
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2024 17:49:53 -0300
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
References: <87h6gynx49.fsf@HIDDEN> <865xxe1dwd.fsf@HIDDEN>
Content-Language: en-US
From: Mauro Aranda <maurooaranda@HIDDEN>
In-Reply-To: <865xxe1dwd.fsf@HIDDEN>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-)
Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN> writes:
> 5. Tab back to "Activate" and press RET, again restoring the initial
> state. Now tab to radio button "Two" and press RET.
> => The fontification is the same as in step 4: radio button "Two" has
> the widget-inactive face but radio button "One" has the default (active)
> face, though it is again inactive. Repeatedly pressing either of the
> radio buttons (after activating them), does not change the fontification
> of "One" again.
>
>
> The faulty fontification of radio button "One" also obtains if there is
> just one radio button instead of two, and if there are more than two
> radio buttons, it is only the first one that displays the odd
> fontification (admittedly, I've only test up to three radio buttons).
>
> I've tried to debug this and found that the problem seems to be due to
> the sexp (set-marker-insertion-type from t) near the end of
> widget-default-create, which advances the marker specified by the
> widget's :from property. Changing t to nil fixes the faulty
> fontification of the first radio button.
>
> I investigated the history of this code, and while the value t for the
> marker insertion type was used in the initial commit, it was changed to
> nil in commit e0f956935, with the message "Insert new text at the :from
> marker _after_ the marker, not before it." But 18 days later it was
> changed back to t in commit 3bff434b8, that also added "Document need to
> put some text before the %v escape in :format string" of editable-field
> widgets. (I looked at the bug-gnu-emacs and emacs-devel mailing list
> archives but found nothing relevant at the time just prior to these
> commits.)
I'm pretty sure it makes sense for user-editable widgets that the
value for insertion-type be t.
> So evidently the advancing marker insertion type is needed for at least
> some widgets, though it seems to be problematic for radio buttons. So I
> tried to conditionalize the choice of t or nil on the type of the
> widget. I used (not (eq 'radio-button (widget-type widget))), since the
> argument `widget' of widget-default-create is, according to Edebug,
> indeed radio-button, so negating the eq sexp returns nil, which I had
> found to be the value of the marker insertion type that fixes the
> fontification (however, I couldn't think of a way of limiting the
> conditioning to only the first radio button, but in my testing so far
> that lack doesn't appear to make a difference).
I'm not sure if the right target is the radio-button widget. It could
be the radio-button-choice widget. Did you try to conditionalize the code
against the radio-button-choice widget?
> But in fact, using the negation of the value of the eq sexp results in
> the same faulty fontification, while omitting the negation (as in the
> attached patch), which yields the advancing insertion type t, gives the
> correct fontification, just like using nil does. This makes no sense to
> me, yet it is reliably reproducible. The only possible explanation that
> occurs to me is that the bug is triggered elsewhere in the Emacs code
> and somehow using the sexp that evaluates to t as the marker insertion
> type affects that code, while using t itself does not (or rather, has
> the opposite effect); but how that could be and where the culpable code
> is, I don't know (as a guess, perhaps in the C code that adds faces, but
> I don't know how to debug that). If anyone knows or has an idea what's
> going on here, please communicate it. In the meantime I will continue
> to use the widget library with the patch to see whether it has unwanted
> consequences.
I don't know much about that code in Emacs. If we find some hack that
works maybe we can use that until someone figures it out. But again,
given your analysis, I'd like to find out if using the condition on the
radio-button-choice widget works as expected. And of course, the hack
shouldn't be added to the widget-default-create, which should remain
type agnostic.
X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#69941: 30.0.50; Faulty fontification of radio button widgets
Resent-From: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2024 18:47:02 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.69941.B69941.171130598030793 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 69941
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords:
To: Mauro Aranda <maurooaranda@HIDDEN>
Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>, 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Stefan Monnier <monnier@HIDDEN>
Received: via spool by 69941-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B69941.171130598030793
(code B ref 69941); Sun, 24 Mar 2024 18:47:02 +0000
Received: (at 69941) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Mar 2024 18:46:20 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47412 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1roSrM-00080a-3R
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 24 Mar 2024 14:46:20 -0400
Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.18]:39777)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <stephen.berman@HIDDEN>) id 1roSrG-00080I-NB
for 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 24 Mar 2024 14:46:18 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmx.net;
s=s31663417; t=1711305922; x=1711910722; i=stephen.berman@HIDDEN;
bh=Qaq0wPObH0uZYr4VirTrZYILcBDbFTp6AKH2U5xoKCg=;
h=X-UI-Sender-Class:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:
Date;
b=hnGl7QG2POXQkHsDENOSvqkXydXUYKezWOBZocsVSLNak1fUXnS9ZJohqkqSVePr
6HQ7wT7bQTJi4856qVpiNLcbVLnXkEIn0MjzIBmZ5YQ8y5eeDw3TXKEU5hM56HMbI
L2jb7g+UthSksnvWaSO4MWPkYFVri4FvmMaaaroNBHiiOZkLBEZUgzUIMI+bWUJrI
6PeuIS3wwq2zuqKwbt/LaLXr1k1pC708EKoYrob2Yd5zBVmig6lSvqT8cjI1Rk3PF
Q/fKYILn51oa7C03yoBlzMId6oiBTIr0iB6UYv4VqOIuUAw/wnVTsWzRQBM1mgzpJ
Q+MYf3cuABQ2pogJ/g==
X-UI-Sender-Class: 724b4f7f-cbec-4199-ad4e-598c01a50d3a
Received: from strobelfs2 ([88.130.49.213]) by mail.gmx.net (mrgmx004
[212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1Mplc7-1seWjP06uL-00q8pH; Sun, 24
Mar 2024 19:45:22 +0100
From: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN>
In-Reply-To: <51c20b56-4b82-4f5c-9559-cdbd0146df22@HIDDEN> (Mauro Aranda's
message of "Sat, 23 Mar 2024 17:49:53 -0300")
References: <87h6gynx49.fsf@HIDDEN> <865xxe1dwd.fsf@HIDDEN>
<51c20b56-4b82-4f5c-9559-cdbd0146df22@HIDDEN>
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2024 19:45:20 +0100
Message-ID: <87wmprqxj3.fsf@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=-=-="
X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:u5xgSeIUyhcZtVjRCnDx7p4HhZSXJ5UpoPYb0SCidWdt5nYDDde
fKtEpQOkX/4xmnvL8uiWk9KtKaJ5gcCbYe3oJL3UpGBmlYPy87YNJSTxzekComNJLa2QTwk
Xz4Mlqdzdx3tk7tfKnJR3jCl0xIX+CGMJtR4TNooeAOS0Jddg5Zxp/QM/E2lTIPcwNtAUDo
VbtkpQ48i1ksXUFQ3XwKA==
X-Spam-Flag: NO
UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:WFEwqBJtTrM=;JYRd7getSvCWTlnMmCKhHXtkGgT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X-Spam-Score: 2.8 (++)
X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org",
has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original
message has been attached to this so you can view it or label
similar future email. If you have any questions, see
the administrator of that system for details.
Content preview: On Sat, 23 Mar 2024 17:49:53 -0300 Mauro Aranda wrote: > Stephen
Berman writes: > >> 5. Tab back to "Activate" and press RET, again restoring
the initial >> =?UTF-8?Q?state.=C2=A0?= Now tab to radio button "Two" and press RET. >> =>
The fontification is the same as in [...]
Content analysis details: (2.8 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
3.6 RCVD_IN_SBL_CSS RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus SBL-CSS
[88.130.49.213 listed in zen.spamhaus.org]
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail
provider (stephen.berman[at]gmx.net)
0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
-0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
low trust
[212.227.15.18 listed in list.dnswl.org]
-0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2 RBL: Average reputation (+2)
[212.227.15.18 listed in wl.mailspike.net]
-0.0 T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE No description available.
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: 1.8 (+)
X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org",
has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original
message has been attached to this so you can view it or label
similar future email. If you have any questions, see
the administrator of that system for details.
Content preview: On Sat, 23 Mar 2024 17:49:53 -0300 Mauro Aranda wrote: > Stephen
Berman writes: > >> 5. Tab back to "Activate" and press RET, again restoring
the initial >> =?UTF-8?Q?state.=C2=A0?= Now tab to radio button "Two" and press RET. >> =>
The fontification is the same as in [...]
Content analysis details: (1.8 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
-0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2 RBL: Average reputation (+2)
[212.227.15.18 listed in wl.mailspike.net]
3.6 RCVD_IN_SBL_CSS RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus SBL-CSS
[88.130.49.213 listed in zen.spamhaus.org]
-0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
low trust
[212.227.15.18 listed in list.dnswl.org]
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail
provider (stephen.berman[at]gmx.net)
0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
-0.0 T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE No description available.
-1.0 MAILING_LIST_MULTI Multiple indicators imply a widely-seen list
manager
--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Sat, 23 Mar 2024 17:49:53 -0300 Mauro Aranda <maurooaranda@HIDDEN> wr=
ote:
> Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN> writes:
>
>> 5. Tab back to "Activate" and press RET, again restoring the initial
>> state.=C2=A0 Now tab to radio button "Two" and press RET.
>> =3D> The fontification is the same as in step 4: radio button "Two" has
>> the widget-inactive face but radio button "One" has the default (active)
>> face, though it is again inactive.=C2=A0 Repeatedly pressing either of t=
he
>> radio buttons (after activating them), does not change the fontification
>> of "One" again.
>>
>>
>> The faulty fontification of radio button "One" also obtains if there is
>> just one radio button instead of two, and if there are more than two
>> radio buttons, it is only the first one that displays the odd
>> fontification (admittedly, I've only test up to three radio buttons).
>>
>> I've tried to debug this and found that the problem seems to be due to
>> the sexp (set-marker-insertion-type from t) near the end of
>> widget-default-create, which advances the marker specified by the
>> widget's :from property.=C2=A0 Changing t to nil fixes the faulty
>> fontification of the first radio button.
>>
>> I investigated the history of this code, and while the value t for the
>> marker insertion type was used in the initial commit, it was changed to
>> nil in commit e0f956935, with the message "Insert new text at the :from
>> marker _after_ the marker, not before it."=C2=A0 But 18 days later it was
>> changed back to t in commit 3bff434b8, that also added "Document need to
>> put some text before the %v escape in :format string" of editable-field
>> widgets.=C2=A0 (I looked at the bug-gnu-emacs and emacs-devel mailing li=
st
>> archives but found nothing relevant at the time just prior to these
>> commits.)
>
> I'm pretty sure it makes sense for user-editable widgets that the
> value for insertion-type be t.
Yes, if my understanding is correct, it's just radio-button-choice
widgets that need (the effect of) insertion type nil (at least for
setting the widget-inactive face), see below.
>> So evidently the advancing marker insertion type is needed for at least
>> some widgets, though it seems to be problematic for radio buttons.=C2=A0=
So I
>> tried to conditionalize the choice of t or nil on the type of the
>> widget.=C2=A0 I used (not (eq 'radio-button (widget-type widget))), sinc=
e the
>> argument `widget' of widget-default-create is, according to Edebug,
>> indeed radio-button, so negating the eq sexp returns nil, which I had
>> found to be the value of the marker insertion type that fixes the
>> fontification (however, I couldn't think of a way of limiting the
>> conditioning to only the first radio button, but in my testing so far
>> that lack doesn't appear to make a difference).
>
> I'm not sure if the right target is the radio-button widget.=C2=A0 It cou=
ld
> be the radio-button-choice widget.=C2=A0 Did you try to conditionalize th=
e code
> against the radio-button-choice widget?
I didn't, because I got hung up on the radio-button widget, since in
Edebug that is what I saw and (mistakenly) took to be the current widget
when widget-inactive face is set. But the resulting marker insertion
type discrepancy is really proof that I was looking at the wrong widget
type (as I already realized in my comments cited below, but I didn't
think to simply try it with radio-button-choice until now, so thanks for
pointing me in the right direction!). And indeed, with
radio-button-choice, negating the eq test DTRT, i.e., using (not (eq
'radio-button-choice (widget-type widget))) as the condtion results in
the correct fontification. Since this sexp gives the
radio-button-choice widget's :from property the marker insertion type
nil, there is no discrepancy between using that sexp and directly using
nil, so changing my patch to use that condition would be in improvement.
Alternatively, ...
>> But in fact, using the negation of the value of the eq sexp results in
>> the same faulty fontification, while omitting the negation (as in the
>> attached patch), which yields the advancing insertion type t, gives the
>> correct fontification, just like using nil does.=C2=A0 This makes no sen=
se to
>> me, yet it is reliably reproducible.=C2=A0 The only possible explanation=
that
>> occurs to me is that the bug is triggered elsewhere in the Emacs code
>> and somehow using the sexp that evaluates to t as the marker insertion
>> type affects that code, while using t itself does not (or rather, has
>> the opposite effect); but how that could be and where the culpable code
>> is, I don't know (as a guess, perhaps in the C code that adds faces, but
>> I don't know how to debug that).=C2=A0 If anyone knows or has an idea wh=
at's
>> going on here, please communicate it.=C2=A0 In the meantime I will conti=
nue
>> to use the widget library with the patch to see whether it has unwanted
>> consequences.
>
> I don't know much about that code in Emacs.=C2=A0 If we find some hack th=
at
> works maybe we can use that until someone figures it out.=C2=A0 But again,
> given your analysis, I'd like to find out if using the condition on the
> radio-button-choice widget works as expected.=C2=A0 And of course, the ha=
ck
> shouldn't be added to the widget-default-create, which should remain
> type agnostic.
... since the issue is fontification with the widget-inactive face,
perhaps a better location for the condition is widget-specify-inactive,
as in the attached patch. It's still a hack though, since
widget-specify-inactive is also type-agnostic by design. But if the
issue really is confined to radio-button-choice widget's, I guess any
solution will have to refer to that type. However, between adding the
condition to widget-specify-inactive or to widget-default-create, I'm
not sure which is less hacky: since the patch to widget-default-create
effectively undoes the result of setting the marker insertion type to t,
perhaps it is cleaner just to set it to nil for radio-button-choice
widgets in widget-default-create. Or maybe someone will come up with a
better fix...
Steve Berman
--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/x-patch
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=widget-specify-inactive.diff
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
diff --git a/lisp/wid-edit.el b/lisp/wid-edit.el
index 172da3db1e0..01319853edc 100644
=2D-- a/lisp/wid-edit.el
+++ b/lisp/wid-edit.el
@@ -532,6 +532,17 @@ widget-inactive
(defun widget-specify-inactive (widget from to)
"Make WIDGET inactive for user modifications."
+ ;; When WIDGET is a radio-button-choice widget and its first child
+ ;; radio-button widget is inserted, the marker FROM, which has
+ ;; insertion type t, advances to the position after the radio button,
+ ;; and since the overlay setting the widget-inactive face begins at
+ ;; the position of FROM, this results in the first radio button
+ ;; incorrectly not being fontified with the widget-inactive face. To
+ ;; ensure it is correctly fontified, we move FROM backward by 3,
+ ;; i.e. the length of the radio-button widget (from its string
+ ;; representation "( )" or "(x)") (bug#69941).
+ (when (eq (widget-type widget) 'radio-button-choice)
+ (set-marker from (- from 3)))
(unless (widget-get widget :inactive)
(let ((overlay (make-overlay from to nil t nil)))
(overlay-put overlay 'face 'widget-inactive)
--=-=-=--
X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#69941: 30.0.50; Faulty fontification of radio button widgets
Resent-From: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2024 15:21:02 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.69941.B69941.171198485814117 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 69941
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords:
To: Mauro Aranda <maurooaranda@HIDDEN>
Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>, 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Stefan Monnier <monnier@HIDDEN>
Received: via spool by 69941-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B69941.171198485814117
(code B ref 69941); Mon, 01 Apr 2024 15:21:02 +0000
Received: (at 69941) by debbugs.gnu.org; 1 Apr 2024 15:20:58 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:51374 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1rrJSz-0003fc-7t
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 01 Apr 2024 11:20:57 -0400
Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.19]:51073)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <stephen.berman@HIDDEN>) id 1rrJSx-0003fP-M8
for 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 01 Apr 2024 11:20:56 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmx.net;
s=s31663417; t=1711984842; x=1712589642; i=stephen.berman@HIDDEN;
bh=ff80F5P1vKxQG38joAlolyhVVnhfX3PY0zV595rYNwE=;
h=X-UI-Sender-Class:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:
Date;
b=raQo+S2tQAJcm1WzTip3r1qVY79R0BtFcGLqRC/0mM2GoIruRhgmvfMjZNrQOZM7
K1jpaYe8Cnroq91DzG3x1rnYUIvMx8qgHE8Srdm11JRWwk2/xNJbwi2BuBashxQny
2gbrcuztCoK4jMd36Y90OyUuRYfWPW1MoF7Ef6M4XbKOUzYr3qNim3Oruz0BNc5qq
8wJm5G2tC0jNNrUgkqsk8RWg+xzlzV5aFtsUDSfcyDFZcs740AGB5onxSj3iUIWAA
V5HbpPJgFT4Ozhhh/EvgMyrYxFfxckQa9jrq1sJPpwmEM+PB49l5cx+5KubcEVOYP
9S2JbZlAjMOaNvsTVw==
X-UI-Sender-Class: 724b4f7f-cbec-4199-ad4e-598c01a50d3a
Received: from strobelfs ([94.134.95.171]) by mail.gmx.net (mrgmx004
[212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MNbp3-1sAlKD0bql-00P8Ad; Mon, 01
Apr 2024 17:20:42 +0200
From: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN>
In-Reply-To: <87wmprqxj3.fsf@HIDDEN> (Stephen Berman's message of "Sun, 24
Mar 2024 19:45:20 +0100")
References: <87h6gynx49.fsf@HIDDEN> <865xxe1dwd.fsf@HIDDEN>
<51c20b56-4b82-4f5c-9559-cdbd0146df22@HIDDEN>
<87wmprqxj3.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2024 17:20:40 +0200
Message-ID: <8734s5w1mf.fsf@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=-=-="
X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:+2qLvW7p7pyS2JmciX6bIMpUPvIkmwZFTfdCvWPE2uomr6jtnk9
XqgiyDbbRTH7bHZ7Icy1fAWKOweNGKx1Zyee5cqIRAUlRyyzd9mk6CzJw0b2K3caweE2VUh
FzCQtxYPMz7A0ov3kgr0E9s+OIvzevpooZ7lxNLX7A5eip9BuYUvled5bM1IEnUToiamBjm
MBfidk/RdVvhSz2AySG8A==
X-Spam-Flag: NO
UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:Vnr9gZ1dvVc=;aHEYg5SoFGlRJ0f4M5BDqHfULyf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X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-)
--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Sun, 24 Mar 2024 19:45:20 +0100 Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN> =
wrote:
> On Sat, 23 Mar 2024 17:49:53 -0300 Mauro Aranda <maurooaranda@HIDDEN> =
wrote:
>
>> Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN> writes:
>>
>>> 5. Tab back to "Activate" and press RET, again restoring the initial
>>> state.=C2=A0 Now tab to radio button "Two" and press RET.
>>> =3D> The fontification is the same as in step 4: radio button "Two" has
>>> the widget-inactive face but radio button "One" has the default (active)
>>> face, though it is again inactive.=C2=A0 Repeatedly pressing either of =
the
>>> radio buttons (after activating them), does not change the fontification
>>> of "One" again.
>>>
>>>
>>> The faulty fontification of radio button "One" also obtains if there is
>>> just one radio button instead of two, and if there are more than two
>>> radio buttons, it is only the first one that displays the odd
>>> fontification (admittedly, I've only test up to three radio buttons).
>>>
>>> I've tried to debug this and found that the problem seems to be due to
>>> the sexp (set-marker-insertion-type from t) near the end of
>>> widget-default-create, which advances the marker specified by the
>>> widget's :from property.=C2=A0 Changing t to nil fixes the faulty
>>> fontification of the first radio button.
>>>
>>> I investigated the history of this code, and while the value t for the
>>> marker insertion type was used in the initial commit, it was changed to
>>> nil in commit e0f956935, with the message "Insert new text at the :from
>>> marker _after_ the marker, not before it."=C2=A0 But 18 days later it w=
as
>>> changed back to t in commit 3bff434b8, that also added "Document need to
>>> put some text before the %v escape in :format string" of editable-field
>>> widgets.=C2=A0 (I looked at the bug-gnu-emacs and emacs-devel mailing l=
ist
>>> archives but found nothing relevant at the time just prior to these
>>> commits.)
>>
>> I'm pretty sure it makes sense for user-editable widgets that the
>> value for insertion-type be t.
>
> Yes, if my understanding is correct, it's just radio-button-choice
> widgets that need (the effect of) insertion type nil (at least for
> setting the widget-inactive face), see below.
>
>>> So evidently the advancing marker insertion type is needed for at least
>>> some widgets, though it seems to be problematic for radio buttons.=C2=
=A0 So I
>>> tried to conditionalize the choice of t or nil on the type of the
>>> widget.=C2=A0 I used (not (eq 'radio-button (widget-type widget))), sin=
ce the
>>> argument `widget' of widget-default-create is, according to Edebug,
>>> indeed radio-button, so negating the eq sexp returns nil, which I had
>>> found to be the value of the marker insertion type that fixes the
>>> fontification (however, I couldn't think of a way of limiting the
>>> conditioning to only the first radio button, but in my testing so far
>>> that lack doesn't appear to make a difference).
>>
>> I'm not sure if the right target is the radio-button widget.=C2=A0 It co=
uld
>> be the radio-button-choice widget.=C2=A0 Did you try to conditionalize t=
he code
>> against the radio-button-choice widget?
>
> I didn't, because I got hung up on the radio-button widget, since in
> Edebug that is what I saw and (mistakenly) took to be the current widget
> when widget-inactive face is set. But the resulting marker insertion
> type discrepancy is really proof that I was looking at the wrong widget
> type (as I already realized in my comments cited below, but I didn't
> think to simply try it with radio-button-choice until now, so thanks for
> pointing me in the right direction!). And indeed, with
> radio-button-choice, negating the eq test DTRT, i.e., using (not (eq
> 'radio-button-choice (widget-type widget))) as the condtion results in
> the correct fontification. Since this sexp gives the
> radio-button-choice widget's :from property the marker insertion type
> nil, there is no discrepancy between using that sexp and directly using
> nil, so changing my patch to use that condition would be in improvement.
> Alternatively, ...
>
>>> But in fact, using the negation of the value of the eq sexp results in
>>> the same faulty fontification, while omitting the negation (as in the
>>> attached patch), which yields the advancing insertion type t, gives the
>>> correct fontification, just like using nil does.=C2=A0 This makes no se=
nse to
>>> me, yet it is reliably reproducible.=C2=A0 The only possible explanatio=
n that
>>> occurs to me is that the bug is triggered elsewhere in the Emacs code
>>> and somehow using the sexp that evaluates to t as the marker insertion
>>> type affects that code, while using t itself does not (or rather, has
>>> the opposite effect); but how that could be and where the culpable code
>>> is, I don't know (as a guess, perhaps in the C code that adds faces, but
>>> I don't know how to debug that).=C2=A0 If anyone knows or has an idea w=
hat's
>>> going on here, please communicate it.=C2=A0 In the meantime I will cont=
inue
>>> to use the widget library with the patch to see whether it has unwanted
>>> consequences.
>>
>> I don't know much about that code in Emacs.=C2=A0 If we find some hack t=
hat
>> works maybe we can use that until someone figures it out.=C2=A0 But agai=
n,
>> given your analysis, I'd like to find out if using the condition on the
>> radio-button-choice widget works as expected.=C2=A0 And of course, the h=
ack
>> shouldn't be added to the widget-default-create, which should remain
>> type agnostic.
>
> ... since the issue is fontification with the widget-inactive face,
> perhaps a better location for the condition is widget-specify-inactive,
> as in the attached patch. It's still a hack though, since
> widget-specify-inactive is also type-agnostic by design. But if the
> issue really is confined to radio-button-choice widget's, I guess any
> solution will have to refer to that type. However, between adding the
> condition to widget-specify-inactive or to widget-default-create, I'm
> not sure which is less hacky: since the patch to widget-default-create
> effectively undoes the result of setting the marker insertion type to t,
> perhaps it is cleaner just to set it to nil for radio-button-choice
> widgets in widget-default-create. Or maybe someone will come up with a
> better fix...
>
> Steve Berman
>
> diff --git a/lisp/wid-edit.el b/lisp/wid-edit.el
> index 172da3db1e0..01319853edc 100644
> --- a/lisp/wid-edit.el
> +++ b/lisp/wid-edit.el
> @@ -532,6 +532,17 @@ widget-inactive
>=20=20
> (defun widget-specify-inactive (widget from to)
> "Make WIDGET inactive for user modifications."
> + ;; When WIDGET is a radio-button-choice widget and its first child
> + ;; radio-button widget is inserted, the marker FROM, which has
> + ;; insertion type t, advances to the position after the radio button,
> + ;; and since the overlay setting the widget-inactive face begins at
> + ;; the position of FROM, this results in the first radio button
> + ;; incorrectly not being fontified with the widget-inactive face. To
> + ;; ensure it is correctly fontified, we move FROM backward by 3,
> + ;; i.e. the length of the radio-button widget (from its string
> + ;; representation "( )" or "(x)") (bug#69941).
> + (when (eq (widget-type widget) 'radio-button-choice)
> + (set-marker from (- from 3)))
> (unless (widget-get widget :inactive)
> (let ((overlay (make-overlay from to nil t nil)))
> (overlay-put overlay 'face 'widget-inactive)
To fix this bug, do you have a preference between this patch for
widget-specify-inactive and the attached patch for
widget-default-create? Or do you have a better fix?
Steve Berman
--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/x-patch
Content-Disposition: attachment
Content-Description: widget-default-create patch
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
diff --git a/lisp/wid-edit.el b/lisp/wid-edit.el
index 172da3db1e0..7fc9ac59b0a 100644
=2D-- a/lisp/wid-edit.el
+++ b/lisp/wid-edit.el
@@ -1733,8 +1733,17 @@ widget-default-create
(goto-char value-pos)
(widget-apply widget :value-create)))
(let ((from (point-min-marker))
- (to (point-max-marker)))
- (set-marker-insertion-type from t)
+ (to (point-max-marker))
+ ;; When WIDGET is a radio-button-choice widget and its first
+ ;; child radio-button widget is inserted, advancing the marker
+ ;; FROM would make the overlay setting the widget-inactive face
+ ;; begin right after the first radio button, which would hence
+ ;; incorrectly not be fontified with the widget-inactive face.
+ ;; To ensure it is correctly fontified, we set the marker
+ ;; insertion type of FROM to nil only when WIDGET is
+ ;; radio-button-choice, otherwise to t (bug#69941).
+ (from-mit (not (eq 'radio-button-choice (widget-type widget)))))
+ (set-marker-insertion-type from from-mit)
(set-marker-insertion-type to nil)
(widget-put widget :from from)
(widget-put widget :to to)))
diff --git a/test/lisp/wid-edit-tests.el b/test/lisp/wid-edit-tests.el
index 4b049478b29..d416eb99022 100644
=2D-- a/test/lisp/wid-edit-tests.el
+++ b/test/lisp/wid-edit-tests.el
@@ -336,7 +336,13 @@ widget-test-widget-move
(widget-forward 2)
(forward-char)
(widget-backward 1)
- (should (string=3D "Second" (widget-value (widget-at))))))
+ (should (string=3D "Second" (widget-value (widget-at))))
+ ;; Check that moving to a widget at beginning of buffer does not
+ ;; signal a beginning-of-buffer error (bug#69943).
+ (widget-backward 1) ; Should not signal beginning-of-buffer error.
+ (widget-forward 2)
+ (should (string=3D "Third" (widget-value (widget-at))))
+ (widget-forward 1))) ; Should not signal beginning-of-buffer error.
(ert-deftest widget-test-color-match ()
"Test that the :match function for the color widget works."
--=-=-=--
X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#69941: 30.0.50; Faulty fontification of radio button widgets
Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Sat, 06 Apr 2024 10:19:02 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.69941.B69941.17123987289488 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 69941
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords:
To: maurooaranda@HIDDEN, Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN>
Cc: 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, monnier@HIDDEN
Received: via spool by 69941-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B69941.17123987289488
(code B ref 69941); Sat, 06 Apr 2024 10:19:02 +0000
Received: (at 69941) by debbugs.gnu.org; 6 Apr 2024 10:18:48 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38357 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1rt38J-0002Sy-OR
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 06 Apr 2024 06:18:48 -0400
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:53318)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1rt38I-0002S5-0M
for 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 06 Apr 2024 06:18:46 -0400
Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e])
by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>)
id 1rt386-0007Dq-E6; Sat, 06 Apr 2024 06:18:34 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org;
s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-version:References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:
Date; bh=zmczGXcrhjuDj6JX8sr4zmTlpHuAHUt6GDGUom0SQsk=; b=J+VINpXNPH3ryUnuZTA7
44gbJXm9yXLNYD/gqdg+QveXys8USendaLClsxjlJsXnM5z2uDZ01m3t1hMoKwWg/UcK5H8P0IN3N
jzjcb+FOLQ75ovHjiyhxiVKFrFxY66w7p+JpSu04X0PZm3Lyhx/1XuJyvXUm/FOnHyEzgxlx7BErg
yn44Thtqhvoi9H3WiB31cVpeaZuVuVi63dKCUAS+njMuJGwgozg3txuW4FPmaqakGTxdXDIQ7i+Au
Ff03qt/Kd0z770p1Pjj9ubmc2LcRBR8eRhz/vK107f+WyiU58Y4gTQ8Tm2C1C8hN/HIM+Cn8RweIe
zNbFLfhE/LJXYg==;
Date: Sat, 06 Apr 2024 13:18:31 +0300
Message-Id: <86plv23ibs.fsf@HIDDEN>
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
In-Reply-To: <8734s5w1mf.fsf@HIDDEN> (message from Stephen Berman on Mon, 01
Apr 2024 17:20:40 +0200)
References: <87h6gynx49.fsf@HIDDEN> <865xxe1dwd.fsf@HIDDEN>
<51c20b56-4b82-4f5c-9559-cdbd0146df22@HIDDEN>
<87wmprqxj3.fsf@HIDDEN> <8734s5w1mf.fsf@HIDDEN>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---)
Ping!
> From: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN>
> Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>, 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Stefan Monnier
> <monnier@HIDDEN>
> Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2024 17:20:40 +0200
>
> On Sun, 24 Mar 2024 19:45:20 +0100 Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 23 Mar 2024 17:49:53 -0300 Mauro Aranda <maurooaranda@HIDDEN> wrote:
> >
> >> Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN> writes:
> >>
> >>> 5. Tab back to "Activate" and press RET, again restoring the initial
> >>> state. Now tab to radio button "Two" and press RET.
> >>> => The fontification is the same as in step 4: radio button "Two" has
> >>> the widget-inactive face but radio button "One" has the default (active)
> >>> face, though it is again inactive. Repeatedly pressing either of the
> >>> radio buttons (after activating them), does not change the fontification
> >>> of "One" again.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> The faulty fontification of radio button "One" also obtains if there is
> >>> just one radio button instead of two, and if there are more than two
> >>> radio buttons, it is only the first one that displays the odd
> >>> fontification (admittedly, I've only test up to three radio buttons).
> >>>
> >>> I've tried to debug this and found that the problem seems to be due to
> >>> the sexp (set-marker-insertion-type from t) near the end of
> >>> widget-default-create, which advances the marker specified by the
> >>> widget's :from property. Changing t to nil fixes the faulty
> >>> fontification of the first radio button.
> >>>
> >>> I investigated the history of this code, and while the value t for the
> >>> marker insertion type was used in the initial commit, it was changed to
> >>> nil in commit e0f956935, with the message "Insert new text at the :from
> >>> marker _after_ the marker, not before it." But 18 days later it was
> >>> changed back to t in commit 3bff434b8, that also added "Document need to
> >>> put some text before the %v escape in :format string" of editable-field
> >>> widgets. (I looked at the bug-gnu-emacs and emacs-devel mailing list
> >>> archives but found nothing relevant at the time just prior to these
> >>> commits.)
> >>
> >> I'm pretty sure it makes sense for user-editable widgets that the
> >> value for insertion-type be t.
> >
> > Yes, if my understanding is correct, it's just radio-button-choice
> > widgets that need (the effect of) insertion type nil (at least for
> > setting the widget-inactive face), see below.
> >
> >>> So evidently the advancing marker insertion type is needed for at least
> >>> some widgets, though it seems to be problematic for radio buttons. So I
> >>> tried to conditionalize the choice of t or nil on the type of the
> >>> widget. I used (not (eq 'radio-button (widget-type widget))), since the
> >>> argument `widget' of widget-default-create is, according to Edebug,
> >>> indeed radio-button, so negating the eq sexp returns nil, which I had
> >>> found to be the value of the marker insertion type that fixes the
> >>> fontification (however, I couldn't think of a way of limiting the
> >>> conditioning to only the first radio button, but in my testing so far
> >>> that lack doesn't appear to make a difference).
> >>
> >> I'm not sure if the right target is the radio-button widget. It could
> >> be the radio-button-choice widget. Did you try to conditionalize the code
> >> against the radio-button-choice widget?
> >
> > I didn't, because I got hung up on the radio-button widget, since in
> > Edebug that is what I saw and (mistakenly) took to be the current widget
> > when widget-inactive face is set. But the resulting marker insertion
> > type discrepancy is really proof that I was looking at the wrong widget
> > type (as I already realized in my comments cited below, but I didn't
> > think to simply try it with radio-button-choice until now, so thanks for
> > pointing me in the right direction!). And indeed, with
> > radio-button-choice, negating the eq test DTRT, i.e., using (not (eq
> > 'radio-button-choice (widget-type widget))) as the condtion results in
> > the correct fontification. Since this sexp gives the
> > radio-button-choice widget's :from property the marker insertion type
> > nil, there is no discrepancy between using that sexp and directly using
> > nil, so changing my patch to use that condition would be in improvement.
> > Alternatively, ...
> >
> >>> But in fact, using the negation of the value of the eq sexp results in
> >>> the same faulty fontification, while omitting the negation (as in the
> >>> attached patch), which yields the advancing insertion type t, gives the
> >>> correct fontification, just like using nil does. This makes no sense to
> >>> me, yet it is reliably reproducible. The only possible explanation that
> >>> occurs to me is that the bug is triggered elsewhere in the Emacs code
> >>> and somehow using the sexp that evaluates to t as the marker insertion
> >>> type affects that code, while using t itself does not (or rather, has
> >>> the opposite effect); but how that could be and where the culpable code
> >>> is, I don't know (as a guess, perhaps in the C code that adds faces, but
> >>> I don't know how to debug that). If anyone knows or has an idea what's
> >>> going on here, please communicate it. In the meantime I will continue
> >>> to use the widget library with the patch to see whether it has unwanted
> >>> consequences.
> >>
> >> I don't know much about that code in Emacs. If we find some hack that
> >> works maybe we can use that until someone figures it out. But again,
> >> given your analysis, I'd like to find out if using the condition on the
> >> radio-button-choice widget works as expected. And of course, the hack
> >> shouldn't be added to the widget-default-create, which should remain
> >> type agnostic.
> >
> > ... since the issue is fontification with the widget-inactive face,
> > perhaps a better location for the condition is widget-specify-inactive,
> > as in the attached patch. It's still a hack though, since
> > widget-specify-inactive is also type-agnostic by design. But if the
> > issue really is confined to radio-button-choice widget's, I guess any
> > solution will have to refer to that type. However, between adding the
> > condition to widget-specify-inactive or to widget-default-create, I'm
> > not sure which is less hacky: since the patch to widget-default-create
> > effectively undoes the result of setting the marker insertion type to t,
> > perhaps it is cleaner just to set it to nil for radio-button-choice
> > widgets in widget-default-create. Or maybe someone will come up with a
> > better fix...
> >
> > Steve Berman
> >
> > diff --git a/lisp/wid-edit.el b/lisp/wid-edit.el
> > index 172da3db1e0..01319853edc 100644
> > --- a/lisp/wid-edit.el
> > +++ b/lisp/wid-edit.el
> > @@ -532,6 +532,17 @@ widget-inactive
> >
> > (defun widget-specify-inactive (widget from to)
> > "Make WIDGET inactive for user modifications."
> > + ;; When WIDGET is a radio-button-choice widget and its first child
> > + ;; radio-button widget is inserted, the marker FROM, which has
> > + ;; insertion type t, advances to the position after the radio button,
> > + ;; and since the overlay setting the widget-inactive face begins at
> > + ;; the position of FROM, this results in the first radio button
> > + ;; incorrectly not being fontified with the widget-inactive face. To
> > + ;; ensure it is correctly fontified, we move FROM backward by 3,
> > + ;; i.e. the length of the radio-button widget (from its string
> > + ;; representation "( )" or "(x)") (bug#69941).
> > + (when (eq (widget-type widget) 'radio-button-choice)
> > + (set-marker from (- from 3)))
> > (unless (widget-get widget :inactive)
> > (let ((overlay (make-overlay from to nil t nil)))
> > (overlay-put overlay 'face 'widget-inactive)
>
> To fix this bug, do you have a preference between this patch for
> widget-specify-inactive and the attached patch for
> widget-default-create? Or do you have a better fix?
>
> Steve Berman
X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#69941: 30.0.50; Faulty fontification of radio button widgets
Resent-From: Mauro Aranda <maurooaranda@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2024 10:20:11 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.69941.B69941.171343556529527 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 69941
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords:
To: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN>
Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>, 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Stefan Monnier <monnier@HIDDEN>
Received: via spool by 69941-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B69941.171343556529527
(code B ref 69941); Thu, 18 Apr 2024 10:20:11 +0000
Received: (at 69941) by debbugs.gnu.org; 18 Apr 2024 10:19:25 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:51532 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1rxOrI-0007fb-Ec
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 18 Apr 2024 06:19:23 -0400
Received: from mail-pf1-x434.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::434]:54766)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <maurooaranda@HIDDEN>) id 1rxOqy-0007cb-LB
for 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 18 Apr 2024 06:19:07 -0400
Received: by mail-pf1-x434.google.com with SMTP id
d2e1a72fcca58-6ed627829e6so823923b3a.1
for <69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 18 Apr 2024 03:18:39 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1713435513; x=1714040313; darn=debbugs.gnu.org;
h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:content-language
:references:cc:to:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id
:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
bh=di0O0Y/jxf1MxlJfQpo5y/d3Uwp9OyL0E9hr5ywyOAQ=;
b=PnR/PGoes0jkYaxCY2FFZKismneeAdFOuLhtcZJ4Zg4o7embkvYNV9VnJ/aeVStV8s
NBHUkXhiEs7qgE6xO7lr3KnpJjcQVXkA60Sg8hXYJABifL8KYSoHnjfFNAcbQZ4XivsP
8FMzFBhIzithz4vFxmxscJUU5xyoxlGonf4Y58B1nate3os5jXY++vqIzuZSOIrOIy4i
m2JH5Bge2sdbA8ahZ0n+RYX9HPkNEgjsDaQtCJVs5u7G2k5QTegmD4QAaHSfGYcauBj5
E/EiMhCpgjOKOfwboDKiAVvXfAxA6SZMtX/ys6pfonKFgKb3MATc2m2b5/g2YG777Z5/
7fHA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1713435513; x=1714040313;
h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:content-language
:references:cc:to:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id
:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
bh=di0O0Y/jxf1MxlJfQpo5y/d3Uwp9OyL0E9hr5ywyOAQ=;
b=qBOo0ewD8ZwUnW0fjYcsh9QWBlH2X2dinjOEQ8vWQ73e/FZYLw0b3QvmU5Q1Qn7wrc
Nj8g8UQtQIUrMyh4rdUa9WjBfBEX0nRwZUrfaMisfRzPp7EJ7JK+VMvpVwiwqmDoLauv
hvxA/AgMM7PSeKVpvV6UxGFYJLITmcedFOWmzv3KAax4BTAsmtXi7VMDVA3hbpqZiZ4L
FotbAay/QDBJSV2M9omb2p6h8puq54LwC/buKZmDwt+3oI9nU+fysBhd3zVmxS1/j9Ce
o3UgEZYeMML5uB51sCEcVVo0lskKSrLj+LnVHdn6yRx5xVgi1vehie4E8pq+6kCt6LDv
KWzQ==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1;
AJvYcCVSIF0Sy3x99KFQJVU3lkAIIeEO92ou9m4V3q/FYiDIFM5/mKJ6YUi8uEWR/w8dpIdqND9W+MnKbobXMp911/ex67/cpbM=
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxUHmg8ndShAUvqtRGT3NiQLLZXvsrCn+vV+uvk5imWJOjH5kGW
+VhuIuIShqefw8qBgtmF5gQMn3H5MBFhehhYF9bSYDUGMQsBtRAVQQ/8Vw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHoyw+Sd/eDQuXnSum+fheMYFXNTFRq3jDYqe43SJesRlT5hJnRSH7chhFHQ3XqzYUC4D/vyQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a21:8015:b0:1a9:a32c:f6d6 with SMTP id
ou21-20020a056a21801500b001a9a32cf6d6mr2327151pzb.55.1713435512900;
Thu, 18 Apr 2024 03:18:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.0.100] ([181.228.33.6])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
u3-20020a631403000000b005bdbe9a597fsm1098165pgl.57.2024.04.18.03.18.31
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128);
Thu, 18 Apr 2024 03:18:32 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <941f6565-203b-47bf-82a9-2bb7b0788b6a@HIDDEN>
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2024 07:18:29 -0300
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
References: <87h6gynx49.fsf@HIDDEN> <865xxe1dwd.fsf@HIDDEN>
<51c20b56-4b82-4f5c-9559-cdbd0146df22@HIDDEN> <87wmprqxj3.fsf@HIDDEN>
<8734s5w1mf.fsf@HIDDEN>
Content-Language: en-US
From: Mauro Aranda <maurooaranda@HIDDEN>
In-Reply-To: <8734s5w1mf.fsf@HIDDEN>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-)
> On Sun, 24 Mar 2024 19:45:20 +0100 Stephen Berman
<stephen.berman@HIDDEN> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 23 Mar 2024 17:49:53 -0300 Mauro Aranda
<maurooaranda@HIDDEN> wrote:
>>
>>> Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN> writes:
>>>
>>>> 5. Tab back to "Activate" and press RET, again restoring the initial
>>>> state. Now tab to radio button "Two" and press RET.
>>>> => The fontification is the same as in step 4: radio button "Two" has
>>>> the widget-inactive face but radio button "One" has the default
(active)
>>>> face, though it is again inactive. Repeatedly pressing either of the
>>>> radio buttons (after activating them), does not change the
fontification
>>>> of "One" again.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The faulty fontification of radio button "One" also obtains if
there is
>>>> just one radio button instead of two, and if there are more than two
>>>> radio buttons, it is only the first one that displays the odd
>>>> fontification (admittedly, I've only test up to three radio buttons).
>>>>
>>>> I've tried to debug this and found that the problem seems to be due to
>>>> the sexp (set-marker-insertion-type from t) near the end of
>>>> widget-default-create, which advances the marker specified by the
>>>> widget's :from property. Changing t to nil fixes the faulty
>>>> fontification of the first radio button.
>>>>
>>>> I investigated the history of this code, and while the value t for the
>>>> marker insertion type was used in the initial commit, it was
changed to
>>>> nil in commit e0f956935, with the message "Insert new text at the
:from
>>>> marker _after_ the marker, not before it." But 18 days later it was
>>>> changed back to t in commit 3bff434b8, that also added "Document
need to
>>>> put some text before the %v escape in :format string" of
editable-field
>>>> widgets. (I looked at the bug-gnu-emacs and emacs-devel mailing list
>>>> archives but found nothing relevant at the time just prior to these
>>>> commits.)
>>>
>>> I'm pretty sure it makes sense for user-editable widgets that the
>>> value for insertion-type be t.
>>
>> Yes, if my understanding is correct, it's just radio-button-choice
>> widgets that need (the effect of) insertion type nil (at least for
>> setting the widget-inactive face), see below.
>>
>>>> So evidently the advancing marker insertion type is needed for at
least
>>>> some widgets, though it seems to be problematic for radio
buttons. So I
>>>> tried to conditionalize the choice of t or nil on the type of the
>>>> widget. I used (not (eq 'radio-button (widget-type widget))),
since the
>>>> argument `widget' of widget-default-create is, according to Edebug,
>>>> indeed radio-button, so negating the eq sexp returns nil, which I had
>>>> found to be the value of the marker insertion type that fixes the
>>>> fontification (however, I couldn't think of a way of limiting the
>>>> conditioning to only the first radio button, but in my testing so far
>>>> that lack doesn't appear to make a difference).
>>>
>>> I'm not sure if the right target is the radio-button widget. It could
>>> be the radio-button-choice widget. Did you try to conditionalize
the code
>>> against the radio-button-choice widget?
>>
>> I didn't, because I got hung up on the radio-button widget, since in
>> Edebug that is what I saw and (mistakenly) took to be the current widget
>> when widget-inactive face is set. But the resulting marker insertion
>> type discrepancy is really proof that I was looking at the wrong widget
>> type (as I already realized in my comments cited below, but I didn't
>> think to simply try it with radio-button-choice until now, so thanks for
>> pointing me in the right direction!). And indeed, with
>> radio-button-choice, negating the eq test DTRT, i.e., using (not (eq
>> 'radio-button-choice (widget-type widget))) as the condtion results in
>> the correct fontification. Since this sexp gives the
>> radio-button-choice widget's :from property the marker insertion type
>> nil, there is no discrepancy between using that sexp and directly using
>> nil, so changing my patch to use that condition would be in improvement.
>> Alternatively, ...
>>
>>>> But in fact, using the negation of the value of the eq sexp results in
>>>> the same faulty fontification, while omitting the negation (as in the
>>>> attached patch), which yields the advancing insertion type t,
gives the
>>>> correct fontification, just like using nil does. This makes no
sense to
>>>> me, yet it is reliably reproducible. The only possible
explanation that
>>>> occurs to me is that the bug is triggered elsewhere in the Emacs code
>>>> and somehow using the sexp that evaluates to t as the marker insertion
>>>> type affects that code, while using t itself does not (or rather, has
>>>> the opposite effect); but how that could be and where the culpable
code
>>>> is, I don't know (as a guess, perhaps in the C code that adds
faces, but
>>>> I don't know how to debug that). If anyone knows or has an idea
what's
>>>> going on here, please communicate it. In the meantime I will continue
>>>> to use the widget library with the patch to see whether it has
unwanted
>>>> consequences.
>>>
>>> I don't know much about that code in Emacs. If we find some hack that
>>> works maybe we can use that until someone figures it out. But again,
>>> given your analysis, I'd like to find out if using the condition on the
>>> radio-button-choice widget works as expected. And of course, the hack
>>> shouldn't be added to the widget-default-create, which should remain
>>> type agnostic.
>>
>> ... since the issue is fontification with the widget-inactive face,
>> perhaps a better location for the condition is widget-specify-inactive,
>> as in the attached patch. It's still a hack though, since
>> widget-specify-inactive is also type-agnostic by design. But if the
>> issue really is confined to radio-button-choice widget's, I guess any
>> solution will have to refer to that type. However, between adding the
>> condition to widget-specify-inactive or to widget-default-create, I'm
>> not sure which is less hacky: since the patch to widget-default-create
>> effectively undoes the result of setting the marker insertion type to t,
>> perhaps it is cleaner just to set it to nil for radio-button-choice
>> widgets in widget-default-create. Or maybe someone will come up with a
>> better fix...
>>
>> Steve Berman
>>
>> diff --git a/lisp/wid-edit.el b/lisp/wid-edit.el
>> index 172da3db1e0..01319853edc 100644
>> --- a/lisp/wid-edit.el
>> +++ b/lisp/wid-edit.el
>> @@ -532,6 +532,17 @@ widget-inactive
>>
>> (defun widget-specify-inactive (widget from to)
>> "Make WIDGET inactive for user modifications."
>> + ;; When WIDGET is a radio-button-choice widget and its first child
>> + ;; radio-button widget is inserted, the marker FROM, which has
>> + ;; insertion type t, advances to the position after the radio button,
>> + ;; and since the overlay setting the widget-inactive face begins at
>> + ;; the position of FROM, this results in the first radio button
>> + ;; incorrectly not being fontified with the widget-inactive face. To
>> + ;; ensure it is correctly fontified, we move FROM backward by 3,
>> + ;; i.e. the length of the radio-button widget (from its string
>> + ;; representation "( )" or "(x)") (bug#69941).
>> + (when (eq (widget-type widget) 'radio-button-choice)
>> + (set-marker from (- from 3)))
>> (unless (widget-get widget :inactive)
>> (let ((overlay (make-overlay from to nil t nil)))
>> (overlay-put overlay 'face 'widget-inactive)
>
> To fix this bug, do you have a preference between this patch for
> widget-specify-inactive and the attached patch for
> widget-default-create? Or do you have a better fix?
>
> Steve Berman
I don't really have a better fix. I mean, ideally, we'd find the reason
why the setting behaves differently for the radio-button-choice widget,
and only for the first one in a radio widget, as it seems to me. But
I'll need more time to be able to look into that.
That said, if Eli is OK with installing a minor hack (with a FIXME,
please), I don't have problems. And since it's a hack (and hopefully
temporary), it's better if we keep it at widget-default-create then.
X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#69941: 30.0.50; Faulty fontification of radio button widgets
Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2024 11:35:13 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.69941.B69941.171344009331139 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 69941
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords:
To: Mauro Aranda <maurooaranda@HIDDEN>
Cc: 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, stephen.berman@HIDDEN, monnier@HIDDEN
Received: via spool by 69941-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B69941.171344009331139
(code B ref 69941); Thu, 18 Apr 2024 11:35:13 +0000
Received: (at 69941) by debbugs.gnu.org; 18 Apr 2024 11:34:53 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:51885 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1rxQ2O-00084t-Dy
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 18 Apr 2024 07:34:49 -0400
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:47552)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1rxQ2F-0007xy-Ck
for 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 18 Apr 2024 07:34:38 -0400
Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e])
by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>)
id 1rxQ1w-0003Nb-2S; Thu, 18 Apr 2024 07:34:16 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org;
s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-version:References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:
Date; bh=6gSMNO49Wy91JYXLhuIoCpsxx5tAmn04WKSwwZoaUzo=; b=G7nOYS1CVK5Jx5oZwouJ
X7to6/Qu4KcpqlhyO6CcIB+v8FYwJGTXRZ78OXxAp/TLCdLHpdSOTK1Z/d8lNjp3UPdOYsHCFLddl
PfMhr5w07xcmK2J32drmwkLKpqhxhkCGQb0GyvAmiwKEF1WMZIQztxdrXw7OBrpcmy72k+SGVEbOW
ekfyD46YZuzc3Eeres0V3XTkvL1RUcczvOVqGSERuaPEIQfIHsPI2knPyGiqXwDoy/e6/3Ed7+VAA
lqiSPeqdDEhU51W60PNfskNN5D4Zq8uQ5IPbVjUhU204X2TShm62raHrhTIM12w7KY/mmlVPNKNpy
mOGDns/T6ZlijQ==;
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2024 14:33:57 +0300
Message-Id: <86h6fyewgq.fsf@HIDDEN>
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
In-Reply-To: <941f6565-203b-47bf-82a9-2bb7b0788b6a@HIDDEN> (message from
Mauro Aranda on Thu, 18 Apr 2024 07:18:29 -0300)
References: <87h6gynx49.fsf@HIDDEN> <865xxe1dwd.fsf@HIDDEN>
<51c20b56-4b82-4f5c-9559-cdbd0146df22@HIDDEN> <87wmprqxj3.fsf@HIDDEN>
<8734s5w1mf.fsf@HIDDEN> <941f6565-203b-47bf-82a9-2bb7b0788b6a@HIDDEN>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---)
> Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2024 07:18:29 -0300
> Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>, 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
> Stefan Monnier <monnier@HIDDEN>
> From: Mauro Aranda <maurooaranda@HIDDEN>
>
> > To fix this bug, do you have a preference between this patch for
> > widget-specify-inactive and the attached patch for
> > widget-default-create? Or do you have a better fix?
> >
> > Steve Berman
>
> I don't really have a better fix. I mean, ideally, we'd find the reason
> why the setting behaves differently for the radio-button-choice widget,
> and only for the first one in a radio widget, as it seems to me. But
> I'll need more time to be able to look into that.
>
> That said, if Eli is OK with installing a minor hack (with a FIXME,
> please), I don't have problems. And since it's a hack (and hopefully
> temporary), it's better if we keep it at widget-default-create then.
My opinion doesn't matter much in this case. If you two agree on a
solution, feel free to install it, even if it is not 110% clean.
Thanks.
X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#69941: 30.0.50; Faulty fontification of radio button widgets
Resent-From: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2024 13:41:11 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.69941.B69941.17134476231730 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 69941
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords:
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
Cc: 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Mauro Aranda <maurooaranda@HIDDEN>, monnier@HIDDEN
Received: via spool by 69941-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B69941.17134476231730
(code B ref 69941); Thu, 18 Apr 2024 13:41:11 +0000
Received: (at 69941) by debbugs.gnu.org; 18 Apr 2024 13:40:23 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52498 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1rxRzp-0000Pj-CA
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 18 Apr 2024 09:40:21 -0400
Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.20]:60171)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <stephen.berman@HIDDEN>) id 1rxRyb-0008VL-5D
for 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 18 Apr 2024 09:39:02 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmx.net;
s=s31663417; t=1713447514; x=1714052314; i=stephen.berman@HIDDEN;
bh=Bpn+Kzhkp44m5ai9ZJgNnsITBKWvtTK71aFUlc9VEw4=;
h=X-UI-Sender-Class:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:
Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:cc:
content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:message-id:
mime-version:reply-to:subject:to;
b=VBq1en3vKbRFuA95ZGAGazvv3aMPNuF6/1wQ6VUAQTQLV92svzp3kh5z9/dy9OfF
hzCU9ywdqO7Vpc3D+GIrw0hbmiY7VeSUStnItICWX5jxNc0SFPSMWNlENdLnibFOC
5Qj68AISLAGi4PdLd0Qxg/Ub13/Bq0if83WYpu1SK5MjAyBW9JpcxrPyXg/Ejuyba
4C45vEQuGR9pnd+AUWudY7cejo+k5t/sFapDOUJJR2PjIlkc+t0NV/YSlg2m7rUKw
7v8ncDpWzoKsRg5geXogBLQcpBLgkeOAhwPAUCpGxpyKaILjYoKmdqDyzfHUlY1Hg
S84/T6uniKYWlEexGQ==
X-UI-Sender-Class: 724b4f7f-cbec-4199-ad4e-598c01a50d3a
Received: from strobelfs ([94.134.94.180]) by mail.gmx.net (mrgmx104
[212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MQ5rU-1sJXBq1yMK-00M1Wk; Thu, 18
Apr 2024 15:38:34 +0200
From: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN>
In-Reply-To: <86h6fyewgq.fsf@HIDDEN> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Thu, 18 Apr
2024 14:33:57 +0300")
References: <87h6gynx49.fsf@HIDDEN> <865xxe1dwd.fsf@HIDDEN>
<51c20b56-4b82-4f5c-9559-cdbd0146df22@HIDDEN>
<87wmprqxj3.fsf@HIDDEN> <8734s5w1mf.fsf@HIDDEN>
<941f6565-203b-47bf-82a9-2bb7b0788b6a@HIDDEN>
<86h6fyewgq.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2024 15:38:33 +0200
Message-ID: <875xwehjty.fsf@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:OSa99nQB7C6chAmhlLmEJoR/AIPmnIvES01VA6T56FpJSQHPpEF
EAPp+ukQ+wz1c52/n00YRxVdoIq4F1hR1Mj12jhWQR4rOQrE9Pc9f9te6v+3JNkTlrWZOnz
kiW03WlM7HkUd9QOZ/8AVX+p4tL5gUb6XVfw8WygJUV/JRuyRwkCjtZQ/Jsi9ZbE4HCcgT0
qatCw59crWxiYJf+R9LAA==
X-Spam-Flag: NO
UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:jDlOLEjLU5k=;XwqRQNiS0x7RzCmIpTy1rEll9Pd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X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-)
On Thu, 18 Apr 2024 14:33:57 +0300 Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN> wrote:
>> Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2024 07:18:29 -0300
>> Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>, 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
>> Stefan Monnier <monnier@HIDDEN>
>> From: Mauro Aranda <maurooaranda@HIDDEN>
>>=20
>> > To fix this bug, do you have a preference between this patch for
>> > widget-specify-inactive and the attached patch for
>> > widget-default-create?=C2=A0 Or do you have a better fix?
>> >
>> > Steve Berman
>>=20
>> I don't really have a better fix.=C2=A0 I mean, ideally, we'd find the r=
eason
>> why the setting behaves differently for the radio-button-choice widget,
>> and only for the first one in a radio widget, as it seems to me. But
>> I'll need more time to be able to look into that.
>>=20
>> That said, if Eli is OK with installing a minor hack (with a FIXME,
>> please), I don't have problems.=C2=A0 And since it's a hack (and hopeful=
ly
>> temporary), it's better if we keep it at widget-default-create then.
>
> My opinion doesn't matter much in this case. If you two agree on a
> solution, feel free to install it, even if it is not 110% clean.
I've been using the patch for for widget-specify-inactive in an
application I'm developing that exercises radio-button-choice widgets,
but I'll switch to using the patch for widget-default-create instead.
I've been encountering inconsistent behavior in combination with the use
of widget-unselected face that I haven't tracked down the cause of yet.
I don't expect using the patch for widget-default-create will improve
this issue, but I'll find out. I also plan to test that patch in
combination with widget-unselected face with checklist widgets, which my
application currently does not use. I'll report back here before
committing the patch for widget-default-create (or something else,
depending on the outcome of further testing).
Steve Berman
X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#69941: 30.0.50; Faulty fontification of radio button widgets
Resent-From: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2024 19:47:02 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.69941.B69941.17137287918083 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 69941
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords:
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
Cc: 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Mauro Aranda <maurooaranda@HIDDEN>, monnier@HIDDEN
Received: via spool by 69941-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B69941.17137287918083
(code B ref 69941); Sun, 21 Apr 2024 19:47:02 +0000
Received: (at 69941) by debbugs.gnu.org; 21 Apr 2024 19:46:31 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44555 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1ryd8v-00025v-7u
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 21 Apr 2024 15:46:30 -0400
Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.20]:43305)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <stephen.berman@HIDDEN>) id 1ryd8s-00024b-0O
for 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 21 Apr 2024 15:46:27 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmx.net;
s=s31663417; t=1713728760; x=1714333560; i=stephen.berman@HIDDEN;
bh=O/z8MDbK6Q3B+E63x5sUyRMlqRh/MiPB4wye1dq2ALA=;
h=X-UI-Sender-Class:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:
Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:cc:
content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:message-id:
mime-version:reply-to:subject:to;
b=DWK7bHNjglCRKU4AqVP8ltnrdzM1yc1M/U/xUnc2n8G/APD8qXVJUCAR0/aRBeHu
3hLMB+kNN8HLl9ueXzk/0D/o6RD/a8eAUxNEPn7ErkUqbtSrT2DCBs1G1RgOTovwN
i5fYBZ9h0uf+cIg8m2YMJvM5okzLIFHomhVHn3UJXXxKYASfb/A7PpjjeNi6BKFAb
eblVHldqcKNrVz1zWc+rxVJuvaVwRq5v19Q9BNOXVo4/SeA2AtBR9fllE/IX2c7T1
HyVfAQO9NM17/oOClxvc4enEp4uCOsztqUwKzh6bqk+Ox97+npR5yOY1SqqcBKaFt
MPShLf19eIvhZojvUQ==
X-UI-Sender-Class: 724b4f7f-cbec-4199-ad4e-598c01a50d3a
Received: from strobelfs ([94.134.94.36]) by mail.gmx.net (mrgmx104
[212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MUowb-1s73If1ain-00Qicf; Sun, 21
Apr 2024 21:46:00 +0200
From: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN>
In-Reply-To: <875xwehjty.fsf@HIDDEN> (Stephen Berman's message of "Thu, 18
Apr 2024 15:38:33 +0200")
References: <87h6gynx49.fsf@HIDDEN> <865xxe1dwd.fsf@HIDDEN>
<51c20b56-4b82-4f5c-9559-cdbd0146df22@HIDDEN>
<87wmprqxj3.fsf@HIDDEN> <8734s5w1mf.fsf@HIDDEN>
<941f6565-203b-47bf-82a9-2bb7b0788b6a@HIDDEN>
<86h6fyewgq.fsf@HIDDEN> <875xwehjty.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2024 21:45:59 +0200
Message-ID: <87wmoqlcso.fsf@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:jJ83ul3GOyZbr5usj2s0HVag3pauoc8palp8lvpxPrgumFJWlxN
vg1Lw4TE54PIXjw0xGYeYew75aap+PaXvcMz7NDnyO9XATnOpeLcZ0D29ChXJK11AlCW2g9
yxMmJhtE7P5B1CxFselWp2VvJieS6v1jfSu4unbVeKHbQDAaQg4VSs6WUExFFSJatX6mrw6
iWFRv6VLl2uyoogKsmslA==
X-Spam-Flag: NO
UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:950Y2LXDotY=;dORE+yO/aGq+wXTunsHxi5dM4gt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X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-)
On Thu, 18 Apr 2024 15:38:33 +0200 Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN> =
wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Apr 2024 14:33:57 +0300 Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN> wrote:
>
>>> Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2024 07:18:29 -0300
>>> Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>, 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
>>> Stefan Monnier <monnier@HIDDEN>
>>> From: Mauro Aranda <maurooaranda@HIDDEN>
>>>=20
>>> > To fix this bug, do you have a preference between this patch for
>>> > widget-specify-inactive and the attached patch for
>>> > widget-default-create?=A0 Or do you have a better fix?
>>> >
>>> > Steve Berman
>>>=20
>>> I don't really have a better fix.=A0 I mean, ideally, we'd find the rea=
son
>>> why the setting behaves differently for the radio-button-choice widget,
>>> and only for the first one in a radio widget, as it seems to me. But
>>> I'll need more time to be able to look into that.
>>>=20
>>> That said, if Eli is OK with installing a minor hack (with a FIXME,
>>> please), I don't have problems.=A0 And since it's a hack (and hopefully
>>> temporary), it's better if we keep it at widget-default-create then.
>>
>> My opinion doesn't matter much in this case. If you two agree on a
>> solution, feel free to install it, even if it is not 110% clean.
>
> I've been using the patch for for widget-specify-inactive in an
> application I'm developing that exercises radio-button-choice widgets,
> but I'll switch to using the patch for widget-default-create instead.
> I've been encountering inconsistent behavior in combination with the use
> of widget-unselected face that I haven't tracked down the cause of yet.
> I don't expect using the patch for widget-default-create will improve
> this issue, but I'll find out. I also plan to test that patch in
> combination with widget-unselected face with checklist widgets, which my
> application currently does not use. I'll report back here before
> committing the patch for widget-default-create (or something else,
> depending on the outcome of further testing).
Just a brief status report: My testing does indeed indicate that the
fontification problem with radio-button-choice also occurs with
checklist widgets, though the pattern appears not to be identical; I
need to do more testing and debugging.
Steve Berman
X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#69941: 30.0.50; Faulty fontification of radio button widgets
Resent-From: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2024 12:47:06 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.69941.B69941.17141356089703 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 69941
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords:
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
Cc: 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Mauro Aranda <maurooaranda@HIDDEN>, monnier@HIDDEN
Received: via spool by 69941-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B69941.17141356089703
(code B ref 69941); Fri, 26 Apr 2024 12:47:06 +0000
Received: (at 69941) by debbugs.gnu.org; 26 Apr 2024 12:46:48 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34293 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1s0KyK-0002Ua-My
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 26 Apr 2024 08:46:46 -0400
Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.22]:53055)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <stephen.berman@HIDDEN>) id 1s0KyB-0002Rh-3Z
for 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 26 Apr 2024 08:46:34 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmx.net;
s=s31663417; t=1714135555; x=1714740355; i=stephen.berman@HIDDEN;
bh=AnRUioFZuIh5w5N8f0TgiKqr3A4B/BEJO2TwQ2vO25E=;
h=X-UI-Sender-Class:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:
Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:cc:content-transfer-encoding:
content-type:date:from:message-id:mime-version:reply-to:subject:
to;
b=Ubd8UYNidzZFlesjnsxoIMqYBbepezqUedivCOrIYi+7GnWE62JOHMjSlE6S8Ix/
5VS65GCt3RUWc0voNHQ9FKQ/gjm5qLp5WQWYwjknZxi9S8ufsDqY7FxlfRNvex1wD
9588vhVtRDohs/fpjgr1dxAOxLneKCl2ai5dkZVBWTGqcMvTY1Fa0nK0ZS26n1tgn
o8Fbgr2YXaLr9/w6A67ZyYbiDHlvCIPQrgUN7Kx0ZXLIOD7hYz/86GqTeTOm7fQXq
lAdDCqspCQbOC5apT8MUGyLUyY207zT6Ft0koo9kZOU8SAzkFF+Gs+5CKLTIfssFJ
HQwAl8KDyv+dn5gAtA==
X-UI-Sender-Class: 724b4f7f-cbec-4199-ad4e-598c01a50d3a
Received: from strobelfs ([94.134.94.5]) by mail.gmx.net (mrgmx105
[212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MBDnC-1rpreH2npW-00Cfof; Fri, 26
Apr 2024 14:45:55 +0200
From: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN>
In-Reply-To: <87wmoqlcso.fsf@HIDDEN> (Stephen Berman's message of "Sun, 21
Apr 2024 21:45:59 +0200")
References: <87h6gynx49.fsf@HIDDEN> <865xxe1dwd.fsf@HIDDEN>
<51c20b56-4b82-4f5c-9559-cdbd0146df22@HIDDEN>
<87wmprqxj3.fsf@HIDDEN> <8734s5w1mf.fsf@HIDDEN>
<941f6565-203b-47bf-82a9-2bb7b0788b6a@HIDDEN>
<86h6fyewgq.fsf@HIDDEN> <875xwehjty.fsf@HIDDEN>
<87wmoqlcso.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2024 14:45:54 +0200
Message-ID: <87plucl2bh.fsf@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=-=-="
X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:WKp7GSBn+Q1oEf6ok4wUb7eDgDyfaDIrqU4GZV90Os4ls1qtmuH
zauhslO0y5An4yVCfgbFctauZAzSC2mccWzuXeMJNz7GPcx4Y1JHBTlgenJwWpz4FTYrz2s
ISYjLAoz/lrGpXRgT8Lc/tvprTEjqsoghP2YmzJcthNobedmYQxH0AhURPqzLI1KAEKYrZZ
KcdqlplE+UkdrLpEGHFmQ==
X-Spam-Flag: NO
UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:QoH3/B5O/1M=;UkM2oqKni68JhnFTiHwI6/l5SgI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X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-)
--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Sun, 21 Apr 2024 21:45:59 +0200 Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN> =
wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Apr 2024 15:38:33 +0200 Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN=
> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 18 Apr 2024 14:33:57 +0300 Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN> wrote:
>>
>>>> Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2024 07:18:29 -0300
>>>> Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>, 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
>>>> Stefan Monnier <monnier@HIDDEN>
>>>> From: Mauro Aranda <maurooaranda@HIDDEN>
>>>>=20
>>>> > To fix this bug, do you have a preference between this patch for
>>>> > widget-specify-inactive and the attached patch for
>>>> > widget-default-create?=C2=A0 Or do you have a better fix?
>>>> >
>>>> > Steve Berman
>>>>=20
>>>> I don't really have a better fix.=C2=A0 I mean, ideally, we'd find the=
reason
>>>> why the setting behaves differently for the radio-button-choice widget,
>>>> and only for the first one in a radio widget, as it seems to me. But
>>>> I'll need more time to be able to look into that.
>>>>=20
>>>> That said, if Eli is OK with installing a minor hack (with a FIXME,
>>>> please), I don't have problems.=C2=A0 And since it's a hack (and hopef=
ully
>>>> temporary), it's better if we keep it at widget-default-create then.
>>>
>>> My opinion doesn't matter much in this case. If you two agree on a
>>> solution, feel free to install it, even if it is not 110% clean.
>>
>> I've been using the patch for for widget-specify-inactive in an
>> application I'm developing that exercises radio-button-choice widgets,
>> but I'll switch to using the patch for widget-default-create instead.
>> I've been encountering inconsistent behavior in combination with the use
>> of widget-unselected face that I haven't tracked down the cause of yet.
>> I don't expect using the patch for widget-default-create will improve
>> this issue, but I'll find out. I also plan to test that patch in
>> combination with widget-unselected face with checklist widgets, which my
>> application currently does not use. I'll report back here before
>> committing the patch for widget-default-create (or something else,
>> depending on the outcome of further testing).
>
> Just a brief status report: My testing does indeed indicate that the
> fontification problem with radio-button-choice also occurs with
> checklist widgets, though the pattern appears not to be identical; I
> need to do more testing and debugging.
Further testing confirms that checklists are subject to this problem, so
I've added them to the attached patch. The rest of this post reports
results from and speculations based on my debugging efforts, which
remain somewhat inconclusive.
According to my tests, checklists and radio-button-choice widgets do
indeed display the same problem with the first checkbox or radio-button,
respectively: if it's selected and then the parent widget is
deactivated, then the button/checkbox incorrectly does not have
widget-inactive face. I think the reason for this is that selecting
inserts "[X]" for the checkbox and "(*)" for the radio-button, and since
the parent widget's :from property has marker insertion type `t', its
position advances to after the insertion (I guess this is because the
starting position of the first checkbox/button coincides with the parent
widget's :from), so the overlay with the widget-inactive face beginning
at :from does not cover the checkbox/button.
But checklists and radio-button-choice widgets differ when a non-initial
checkbox/button is selected. With checklists, multiple checkboxes can
be selected, and selecting the second checkbox does not advance the
parent widget's :from position, unlike with radio-button-choice widget's
when selecting the second radio-button, as I reported in my OP. I think
this is because in radio-button-choice widgets only one radio-button can
be selected, so selecting any one triggers the :from marker's advancing.
I could not verify this hypothesis through debugging because I was
unable to find out exactly when this happens. The marker advance is
done in the C code, I think at adjust_markers_for_insert in insdel.c; I
set a gdb breakpoint there and this triggers when I select a radio
button, but it's too early: a lot happens in wid-edit.el between
selecting a button and the selection becoming visible, and the
breakpoint triggered so often that I gave up. Is there a way to make a
breakpoint in the C code trigger only when a specific part of
wid-edit.el is evaluated?
Nevertheless, by assigning the :from marker the insertion type nil in
widget-default-create when the widget is either a checklist or
radio-button-choice, does result in the correct fontification of the
first checkbox/radio-button in all tests I've conducted with varying the
selection. And conceptually it seems to me correct that :from should
not advance with these widgets: selecting a checkbox or button is
operationally quite different from inserting text (e.g. in an
editable-field widget), even though the implementation technically
involves insertion. So I think the attached patch is at least a viable
stopgap, until a better (or at least less ad hoc) fix is found.
Steve Berman
--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/x-patch
Content-Disposition: attachment
Content-Description: widget-default-create patch
diff --git a/lisp/wid-edit.el b/lisp/wid-edit.el
index dc481d4d0a5..9304002ff52 100644
--- a/lisp/wid-edit.el
+++ b/lisp/wid-edit.el
@@ -1757,8 +1757,16 @@ widget-default-create
(goto-char value-pos)
(widget-apply widget :value-create)))
(let ((from (point-min-marker))
- (to (point-max-marker)))
- (set-marker-insertion-type from t)
+ (to (point-max-marker))
+ ;; Advancing the `:from' marker of a checklist or
+ ;; radio-button-choice widget on selecting a checkbox or a
+ ;; radio-button, which inserts "[X]" or "(*)", can result in
+ ;; misfontifying the first checkbox (bug#69941). To ensure
+ ;; correct fontification, assign `:from' the marker insertion
+ ;; type `nil', so it does not advance.
+ (from-mit (not (memq (widget-type widget)
+ '(checklist radio-button-choice)))))
+ (set-marker-insertion-type from from-mit)
(set-marker-insertion-type to nil)
(widget-put widget :from from)
(widget-put widget :to to)))
--=-=-=--
X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#69941: 30.0.50; Faulty fontification of radio button widgets
Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Thu, 09 May 2024 07:23:02 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.69941.B69941.171523934027352 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 69941
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords:
To: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN>
Cc: 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, maurooaranda@HIDDEN, monnier@HIDDEN
Received: via spool by 69941-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B69941.171523934027352
(code B ref 69941); Thu, 09 May 2024 07:23:02 +0000
Received: (at 69941) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 May 2024 07:22:20 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:53594 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1s4y6d-000776-Ma
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 09 May 2024 03:22:20 -0400
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:37984)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1s4y6b-000770-Ia
for 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 09 May 2024 03:22:18 -0400
Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e])
by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>)
id 1s4y66-0006qI-5Z; Thu, 09 May 2024 03:21:46 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org;
s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-version:References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:
Date; bh=5wDcDu3+Mcx9f5e/KrXtwAESpPqMX7T/O8Ihf+d2F0Q=; b=UPbEId32X0MVTvK5C7HJ
LGvscj8yJtHIUSVkLPtQEim0uMuGLQFFhFk/zY3EhbGH/FsQLh+piiMSljzG83Y84UxsT+Gul/Hke
tKEomFgrtq6+0Xpv96I8PJN5eov1t3w4RnFNGxTunL8WcMAgr6RCSN3nupaLQgoc7JDuK8SLAda9m
pfvuh3HbWH+SBwSUSURvbLKqVfu0VYLKOifLLoEYZh+CiUK7BUeg+Dl2q8rnoKVMkJs3bg5grwON3
KT096LWPQnhTHDD3iIaaP/wax3XcrrxzPs15aLqDwFJMkcDgiHr8Klv/Ua5BP8mY/w76tCTF4U+Jf
4M9/dii6t1yxtA==;
Date: Thu, 09 May 2024 10:21:44 +0300
Message-Id: <861q6b8n7b.fsf@HIDDEN>
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
In-Reply-To: <87plucl2bh.fsf@HIDDEN> (message from Stephen Berman on Fri, 26
Apr 2024 14:45:54 +0200)
References: <87h6gynx49.fsf@HIDDEN> <865xxe1dwd.fsf@HIDDEN>
<51c20b56-4b82-4f5c-9559-cdbd0146df22@HIDDEN>
<87wmprqxj3.fsf@HIDDEN> <8734s5w1mf.fsf@HIDDEN>
<941f6565-203b-47bf-82a9-2bb7b0788b6a@HIDDEN>
<86h6fyewgq.fsf@HIDDEN> <875xwehjty.fsf@HIDDEN>
<87wmoqlcso.fsf@HIDDEN> <87plucl2bh.fsf@HIDDEN>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---)
Ping! Any comments? Or should we install the proposed patch?
> From: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN>
> Cc: Mauro Aranda <maurooaranda@HIDDEN>, 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
> monnier@HIDDEN
> Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2024 14:45:54 +0200
>
> On Sun, 21 Apr 2024 21:45:59 +0200 Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 18 Apr 2024 15:38:33 +0200 Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN> wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, 18 Apr 2024 14:33:57 +0300 Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN> wrote:
> >>
> >>>> Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2024 07:18:29 -0300
> >>>> Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>, 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
> >>>> Stefan Monnier <monnier@HIDDEN>
> >>>> From: Mauro Aranda <maurooaranda@HIDDEN>
> >>>>
> >>>> > To fix this bug, do you have a preference between this patch for
> >>>> > widget-specify-inactive and the attached patch for
> >>>> > widget-default-create? Or do you have a better fix?
> >>>> >
> >>>> > Steve Berman
> >>>>
> >>>> I don't really have a better fix. I mean, ideally, we'd find the reason
> >>>> why the setting behaves differently for the radio-button-choice widget,
> >>>> and only for the first one in a radio widget, as it seems to me. But
> >>>> I'll need more time to be able to look into that.
> >>>>
> >>>> That said, if Eli is OK with installing a minor hack (with a FIXME,
> >>>> please), I don't have problems. And since it's a hack (and hopefully
> >>>> temporary), it's better if we keep it at widget-default-create then.
> >>>
> >>> My opinion doesn't matter much in this case. If you two agree on a
> >>> solution, feel free to install it, even if it is not 110% clean.
> >>
> >> I've been using the patch for for widget-specify-inactive in an
> >> application I'm developing that exercises radio-button-choice widgets,
> >> but I'll switch to using the patch for widget-default-create instead.
> >> I've been encountering inconsistent behavior in combination with the use
> >> of widget-unselected face that I haven't tracked down the cause of yet.
> >> I don't expect using the patch for widget-default-create will improve
> >> this issue, but I'll find out. I also plan to test that patch in
> >> combination with widget-unselected face with checklist widgets, which my
> >> application currently does not use. I'll report back here before
> >> committing the patch for widget-default-create (or something else,
> >> depending on the outcome of further testing).
> >
> > Just a brief status report: My testing does indeed indicate that the
> > fontification problem with radio-button-choice also occurs with
> > checklist widgets, though the pattern appears not to be identical; I
> > need to do more testing and debugging.
>
> Further testing confirms that checklists are subject to this problem, so
> I've added them to the attached patch. The rest of this post reports
> results from and speculations based on my debugging efforts, which
> remain somewhat inconclusive.
>
> According to my tests, checklists and radio-button-choice widgets do
> indeed display the same problem with the first checkbox or radio-button,
> respectively: if it's selected and then the parent widget is
> deactivated, then the button/checkbox incorrectly does not have
> widget-inactive face. I think the reason for this is that selecting
> inserts "[X]" for the checkbox and "(*)" for the radio-button, and since
> the parent widget's :from property has marker insertion type `t', its
> position advances to after the insertion (I guess this is because the
> starting position of the first checkbox/button coincides with the parent
> widget's :from), so the overlay with the widget-inactive face beginning
> at :from does not cover the checkbox/button.
>
> But checklists and radio-button-choice widgets differ when a non-initial
> checkbox/button is selected. With checklists, multiple checkboxes can
> be selected, and selecting the second checkbox does not advance the
> parent widget's :from position, unlike with radio-button-choice widget's
> when selecting the second radio-button, as I reported in my OP. I think
> this is because in radio-button-choice widgets only one radio-button can
> be selected, so selecting any one triggers the :from marker's advancing.
> I could not verify this hypothesis through debugging because I was
> unable to find out exactly when this happens. The marker advance is
> done in the C code, I think at adjust_markers_for_insert in insdel.c; I
> set a gdb breakpoint there and this triggers when I select a radio
> button, but it's too early: a lot happens in wid-edit.el between
> selecting a button and the selection becoming visible, and the
> breakpoint triggered so often that I gave up. Is there a way to make a
> breakpoint in the C code trigger only when a specific part of
> wid-edit.el is evaluated?
>
> Nevertheless, by assigning the :from marker the insertion type nil in
> widget-default-create when the widget is either a checklist or
> radio-button-choice, does result in the correct fontification of the
> first checkbox/radio-button in all tests I've conducted with varying the
> selection. And conceptually it seems to me correct that :from should
> not advance with these widgets: selecting a checkbox or button is
> operationally quite different from inserting text (e.g. in an
> editable-field widget), even though the implementation technically
> involves insertion. So I think the attached patch is at least a viable
> stopgap, until a better (or at least less ad hoc) fix is found.
>
> Steve Berman
X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#69941: 30.0.50; Faulty fontification of radio button widgets
Resent-From: Stefan Monnier <monnier@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Thu, 09 May 2024 14:17:02 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.69941.B69941.171526416813005 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 69941
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords:
To: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN>
Cc: 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Received: via spool by 69941-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B69941.171526416813005
(code B ref 69941); Thu, 09 May 2024 14:17:02 +0000
Received: (at 69941) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 May 2024 14:16:08 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55521 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1s54Z5-0003Nh-Nl
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 09 May 2024 10:16:08 -0400
Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:19493)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <monnier@HIDDEN>) id 1s54Z1-0003NA-37
for 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 09 May 2024 10:16:06 -0400
Received: from pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 2FC58100061;
Thu, 9 May 2024 10:15:31 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca;
s=mail; t=1715264130;
bh=teBw9Nff12NRjd1WqE7bOqaZPXFD3kgQI0DBjEwLE2s=;
h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From;
b=gLbyBGDANenePv9EhHh0+fbRWS1D4IiNIjsFJkUlNYWUKv2X3PHPTad5GI8NHedZt
M4Pg/au2GhqpwC40GMRU2fHoRdGbHzDlgAd6QB1/mlikV46pSgi+9sckFesw2L3f5p
fS1hGutRDt3yz8pgNgxOwyuH1/DJeoOubBik34ukiQVCH7xH8QOSo6xsGlUNvsx0Pm
lamVnypgDaI5KzSD+8KXXc/urv5L4G+3R0fFnSZTrrLpQjXtag/FKIZWpEriwfX9Y3
h37dYcGJvB7N41o0e2x5K2L5jJuGCQwTsulbP7YJtvESIJH2ArPM4c9EDfTb3SCneL
vZY+v6KXbSEeA==
Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1])
by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 0CDA7100035;
Thu, 9 May 2024 10:15:30 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from pastel (unknown [45.72.201.215])
by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DD92D120352;
Thu, 9 May 2024 10:15:29 -0400 (EDT)
From: Stefan Monnier <monnier@HIDDEN>
In-Reply-To: <87h6gynx49.fsf@HIDDEN> (Stephen Berman's message of "Fri, 22 Mar
2024 15:45:42 +0100")
Message-ID: <jwvv83nytb9.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN>
References: <87h6gynx49.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Thu, 09 May 2024 10:15:29 -0400
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-SPAM-INFO: Spam detection results: 0
ALL_TRUSTED -1 Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP
AWL 0.003 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
DKIM_SIGNED 0.1 Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
DKIM_VALID -0.1 Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
DKIM_VALID_AU -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's
domain
DKIM_VALID_EF -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from envelope-from
domain
X-SPAM-LEVEL:
X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---)
> I investigated the history of this code, and while the value t for the
> marker insertion type was used in the initial commit, it was changed to
> nil in commit e0f956935, with the message "Insert new text at the :from
> marker _after_ the marker, not before it." But 18 days later it was
> changed back to t in commit 3bff434b8, that also added "Document need to
> put some text before the %v escape in :format string" of editable-field
> widgets. (I looked at the bug-gnu-emacs and emacs-devel mailing list
> archives but found nothing relevant at the time just prior to these
> commits.)
I'm really not familiar with the widget code, but looking around that
code I see that we have
(set-marker-insertion-type BLAfromBLA t)
(set-marker-insertion-type BLAtoBLA nil)
at various places, and I think that makes a lot of sense when you
consider that we don't want text inserted right before or right after
the widget to suddenly become part of the widget.
But OTOH while "printing" the widget itself, we'd want the exact
opposite (i.e. nil for from and t for to).
Could it be that part of the problem is that the insertion of
a radio-button widget into a radio-button-choice widget is done "too
late", i.e. after the radio-button-choice widget has been printed?
Stefan
X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#69941: 30.0.50; Faulty fontification of radio button widgets
Resent-From: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Sat, 11 May 2024 14:00:01 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.69941.B69941.171543597328981 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 69941
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords:
To: Stefan Monnier <monnier@HIDDEN>
Cc: 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Received: via spool by 69941-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B69941.171543597328981
(code B ref 69941); Sat, 11 May 2024 14:00:01 +0000
Received: (at 69941) by debbugs.gnu.org; 11 May 2024 13:59:33 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48508 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1s5nG9-0007XN-2T
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 11 May 2024 09:59:33 -0400
Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.20]:50271)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <stephen.berman@HIDDEN>) id 1s5nG6-0007XH-Cd
for 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 11 May 2024 09:59:31 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmx.net;
s=s31663417; t=1715435961; x=1716040761; i=stephen.berman@HIDDEN;
bh=4CWIvq0+5jFtY1bkwIFLhbH8MYnh0cJ0t7gxigDf8Jw=;
h=X-UI-Sender-Class:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:
Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:cc:content-transfer-encoding:
content-type:date:from:message-id:mime-version:reply-to:subject:
to;
b=cF+YoAOkBh4HtLSMHNTWp3lnrE+8RvHQwgLPqveVSfH4oUFWDLcQsEd4JlyQtk7f
v6nqLCTGLeTYr38QovrxV/2u1FY9BqCDHzEawPKwvJd2sr+27kJR6oIj3Do4mJyfA
MI5XbwlbrDvzx2DhPLrNO1g32FFow8zfwpRhAsZPpkDnsgJI6KUOg/xJcGuvYLWc8
kms24VaMhus5tMqjTYwpcFR9okplPyDYZvsYXT9OFEkfDnQWFSDnAY7wwbI36YdGU
ERkB4Psxur7VKgNUYMcKhu9dUE5Gp7vY5ROiItHyOJTYKm/ENltukfaOz+M4J5fgE
kjeiI++ZwBbyoXYMSg==
X-UI-Sender-Class: 724b4f7f-cbec-4199-ad4e-598c01a50d3a
Received: from strobelfs ([88.130.48.180]) by mail.gmx.net (mrgmx104
[212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MWzjt-1s7aXh3Gx7-00VzU5; Sat, 11
May 2024 15:59:20 +0200
From: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN>
In-Reply-To: <jwvv83nytb9.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN> (Stefan Monnier's message
of "Thu, 09 May 2024 10:15:29 -0400")
References: <87h6gynx49.fsf@HIDDEN> <jwvv83nytb9.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN>
Date: Sat, 11 May 2024 15:59:19 +0200
Message-ID: <87o79c8n60.fsf@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:8ie99ZWOvcUn5GPLZdcOYD/6o42APt1/03c43jjTe3KLyrhY7v8
FlrvJyjx4eQniC9o5aNMjB0PrYKwMcJZ6HTF3XE/sXKyWIZRoJRJI8USPASrPLEJovucN7K
3htt+Dy3etAScikaGlr32cA8TYkkDldvbpgkqhO0TrRN2ZBQXVszYelsTijlO24gbqhC8Wc
ul5OoNVxOUhyGwfKyL6qA==
X-Spam-Flag: NO
UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:eUrLRlKWbUU=;INLAThrPJtfrabT7upcnIeXmKt1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X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-)
On Thu, 09 May 2024 10:15:29 -0400 Stefan Monnier <monnier@HIDDEN> wrote:
>> I investigated the history of this code, and while the value t for the
>> marker insertion type was used in the initial commit, it was changed to
>> nil in commit e0f956935, with the message "Insert new text at the :from
>> marker _after_ the marker, not before it." But 18 days later it was
>> changed back to t in commit 3bff434b8, that also added "Document need to
>> put some text before the %v escape in :format string" of editable-field
>> widgets. (I looked at the bug-gnu-emacs and emacs-devel mailing list
>> archives but found nothing relevant at the time just prior to these
>> commits.)
>
> I'm really not familiar with the widget code, but looking around that
> code I see that we have
>
> (set-marker-insertion-type BLAfromBLA t)
> (set-marker-insertion-type BLAtoBLA nil)
>
> at various places, and I think that makes a lot of sense when you
> consider that we don't want text inserted right before or right after
> the widget to suddenly become part of the widget.
Yes, Mauro Aranda's response to my OP also made this point, though not
so explicitly, so I think it sort of went by me, but after reading your
comment, I did some further testing and, indeed, my latest patch (I've
only tested that but the other versions I've posted should not differ in
this respect) does result in text inserted directly before a checklist
or radio-button-choice widget being after the widget's :from marker,
which makes the text get covered by the widget-inactive overlay, which
it should not be.
So it seems that either my patch is not the right fix for the
fontification problem, or it has to be accompanied by further
adjustments. I've briefly looked at the latter approach, thinking that
using insert-before-markers might help, but my attempts have failed so
far.
> But OTOH while "printing" the widget itself, we'd want the exact
> opposite (i.e. nil for from and t for to).
>
> Could it be that part of the problem is that the insertion of
> a radio-button widget into a radio-button-choice widget is done "too
> late", i.e. after the radio-button-choice widget has been printed?
To avoid this I suspect that the radio-button-choice widget would have
to be redesigned, and also the checklist widget, which has a similar
issue. Although, it seems that a viable alternative to using checklist
widgets may be simply to use checkbox widgets, as e.g. recentf-edit-list
does. But radio buttons have to be grouped, since only one per group
can be selected. How to do this without using an enclosing widget like
radio-button-choice, which by definition has it's own :from and :to
properties, I don't know.
Steve Berman
X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#69941: 30.0.50; Faulty fontification of radio button widgets
Resent-From: Stefan Monnier <monnier@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Mon, 13 May 2024 02:23:01 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.69941.B69941.171556696919006 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 69941
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords:
To: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN>
Cc: 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Received: via spool by 69941-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B69941.171556696919006
(code B ref 69941); Mon, 13 May 2024 02:23:01 +0000
Received: (at 69941) by debbugs.gnu.org; 13 May 2024 02:22:49 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57722 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1s6LKy-0004wT-Vg
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 12 May 2024 22:22:49 -0400
Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:32539)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <monnier@HIDDEN>) id 1s6LKv-0004w9-W4
for 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 12 May 2024 22:22:48 -0400
Received: from pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id C35F0808BA;
Sun, 12 May 2024 22:22:39 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca;
s=mail; t=1715566958;
bh=JLP9ciAKiPh3ZKZTowUIs89NaDy/yNc5vgO1yA9c4y4=;
h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From;
b=G0jo4ktK7tsILehu6342V4TitF8CwBoDbfx8T2fX82WHvYsKZJi26mFbNdNTzUpzV
lHqWeDvfzZpVbUp3tmr53sctb2EyMZ1/L2KsNhSvibOi6UTmCbuAaTB71PG0n8Lt8K
AbNXo7E2SmqtCeZwgtUWo5kKBUbrlSQu8z/c9nhDDm2vFvn+fQuB5Kr6fzo9gAUtUo
68tGVQCgLhL49luhddIB4bpw5YLMstEzKU3HsL4SJvcWGuWvBYwiMWBTHR6nuZ3zKR
DuBeF+Zyu9Xp01QdhJ+5da6jbpzwEzANNppozIm1t0t0h4ATpmVO3Xhrg1X3t5+GAf
RkfEJeGIv1WZw==
Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1])
by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id B56538060F;
Sun, 12 May 2024 22:22:38 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from pastel (unknown [45.72.201.215])
by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 921E2120480;
Sun, 12 May 2024 22:22:38 -0400 (EDT)
From: Stefan Monnier <monnier@HIDDEN>
In-Reply-To: <87o79c8n60.fsf@HIDDEN> (Stephen Berman's message of "Sat, 11
May 2024 15:59:19 +0200")
Message-ID: <jwvo79awixb.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN>
References: <87h6gynx49.fsf@HIDDEN> <jwvv83nytb9.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN>
<87o79c8n60.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Sun, 12 May 2024 22:22:38 -0400
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-SPAM-INFO: Spam detection results: 0
ALL_TRUSTED -1 Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP
AWL -0.038 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
DKIM_SIGNED 0.1 Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
DKIM_VALID -0.1 Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
DKIM_VALID_AU -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's
domain
DKIM_VALID_EF -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from envelope-from
domain
X-SPAM-LEVEL:
X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---)
>> Could it be that part of the problem is that the insertion of
>> a radio-button widget into a radio-button-choice widget is done "too
>> late", i.e. after the radio-button-choice widget has been printed?
> To avoid this I suspect that the radio-button-choice widget would have
> to be redesigned, and also the checklist widget, which has a similar
> issue.
What does "this" refer to?"
Stefan
X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#69941: 30.0.50; Faulty fontification of radio button widgets
Resent-From: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Mon, 13 May 2024 13:17:02 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.69941.B69941.17156061695395 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 69941
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords:
To: Stefan Monnier <monnier@HIDDEN>
Cc: 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Received: via spool by 69941-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B69941.17156061695395
(code B ref 69941); Mon, 13 May 2024 13:17:02 +0000
Received: (at 69941) by debbugs.gnu.org; 13 May 2024 13:16:09 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60942 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1s6VXA-0001KQ-Nb
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 13 May 2024 09:16:09 -0400
Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.22]:45875)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <stephen.berman@HIDDEN>) id 1s6VX7-000116-8u
for 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 13 May 2024 09:16:02 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmx.net;
s=s31663417; t=1715606151; x=1716210951; i=stephen.berman@HIDDEN;
bh=xHHmNok33dnN9/8J2MqPjm1ITjpX9hBn1arXGf3YONE=;
h=X-UI-Sender-Class:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:
Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:cc:content-transfer-encoding:
content-type:date:from:message-id:mime-version:reply-to:subject:
to;
b=LO/IISNfP+U1V0FGic/oG0IFUHjBNzXEH7mBbRwQ7RjDTBkWfZLQO3BgLX9x70bn
cqJfbe8z3jr87M/OKxVyaJUzRu4Gc2y7gVG5zCdZJfDhIUipX6xW7BKIFI8ipA5e0
xRUuuz55/8YomfgmuSjcRNAY8lKizZw9oYkz5GjfasuRX362CilYiP7HJF2as2axI
tOb9B/Hne2UuyHLDKCQmcOxvqbnmXirGYo+C1duzclItwwLbmqPhodIU1PLSoA2UT
+snD5E8n5ahwkU80UK0slyQljzjTh5YCssK6kNbJtjAiyx9Mb51NayHeuV108fo1g
ZEmuTiEZdnMVUyIYwQ==
X-UI-Sender-Class: 724b4f7f-cbec-4199-ad4e-598c01a50d3a
Received: from strobelfs ([94.134.95.151]) by mail.gmx.net (mrgmx104
[212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1N17UQ-1sYnpV0Idm-011ki7; Mon, 13
May 2024 15:15:51 +0200
From: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN>
In-Reply-To: <jwvo79awixb.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN> (Stefan Monnier's message
of "Sun, 12 May 2024 22:22:38 -0400")
References: <87h6gynx49.fsf@HIDDEN> <jwvv83nytb9.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN>
<87o79c8n60.fsf@HIDDEN> <jwvo79awixb.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN>
Date: Mon, 13 May 2024 15:15:50 +0200
Message-ID: <87zfst4zuh.fsf@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:5JPCIr+VI+9QCRef7RarPQCWkjIEh0ITpZghI8RNmqMlxDeWlvO
mbRvepoedzQGVBcUOOC3fsN7YxzpQlb+oxxKHdNz/2c+7ges4E+TKJm9GuSpnMjKoJ6STjo
tIQwu+bgumB2z99V0ZBbKmALKsOXuA0xp1wxX/YIK10HNhM5ILpML4BkWmefkxlTaB17G0x
VeB2cfDsl7oI0Ul/Vvxbg==
X-Spam-Flag: NO
UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:GljMnP3eOaE=;OwqWkdzqdws5VUYqXXILHcbNu59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X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-)
On Sun, 12 May 2024 22:22:38 -0400 Stefan Monnier <monnier@HIDDEN> wrote:
>>> Could it be that part of the problem is that the insertion of
>>> a radio-button widget into a radio-button-choice widget is done "too
>>> late", i.e. after the radio-button-choice widget has been printed?
>> To avoid this I suspect that the radio-button-choice widget would have
>> to be redesigned, and also the checklist widget, which has a similar
>> issue.
>
> What does "this" refer to?"
I meant the "too late" insertion of radio buttons into
radio-button-choice widgets (and likewise of checkboxes into checklist
widgets), because IIUC the way this is currently done (by
widget-radio-add-item and widget-checklist-add-item, respectively)
requires that the container widget is already in the buffer.
Steve Berman
X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#69941: 30.0.50; Faulty fontification of radio button widgets
Resent-From: Stefan Monnier <monnier@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Mon, 13 May 2024 13:27:02 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.69941.B69941.17156068066303 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 69941
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords:
To: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN>
Cc: 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Received: via spool by 69941-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B69941.17156068066303
(code B ref 69941); Mon, 13 May 2024 13:27:02 +0000
Received: (at 69941) by debbugs.gnu.org; 13 May 2024 13:26:46 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60988 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1s6VhW-0001da-3b
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 13 May 2024 09:26:46 -0400
Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:19164)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <monnier@HIDDEN>) id 1s6VhS-0001dU-6E
for 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 13 May 2024 09:26:44 -0400
Received: from pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 2A1598092E;
Mon, 13 May 2024 09:26:34 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca;
s=mail; t=1715606793;
bh=8aTCCNRrucjs028dZYSYZiNG7ng8Et1O7O6ccbpeioY=;
h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From;
b=oQTdB9k4sPVEoN6ZtehrDOR7eRAV6HBWVg3rlS/mpuFi5fNKdmN/T/kyGC79raZpV
DJbT6EuMdiUw4k7707dxBnpjwpoPxdHCq8IvMZ5QaMBZoyK5MSc2+E6A1QOCNIMJf6
jBMFBSeNFBEOrPwtpNwUXHGeQyvs9FRinBa2ASnnxG/n3H4B12LIebtywrW0+d9ujv
My4xemxG5YBaxL0mWoYakxkfw+O82aQDITEIbC8pGU6h8EUEesJ88KAz2bETz6kfYg
RO+cPuPBbeu5V3vV/O71H4FK+c6dQDkLg3E8pcu6J3orQgZdYlW1q/KXZZcziKGJUy
q6yl75SLXHYdg==
Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1])
by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 0E94E8064F;
Mon, 13 May 2024 09:26:33 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from pastel (unknown [45.72.201.215])
by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DCB1012012E;
Mon, 13 May 2024 09:26:32 -0400 (EDT)
From: Stefan Monnier <monnier@HIDDEN>
In-Reply-To: <87zfst4zuh.fsf@HIDDEN> (Stephen Berman's message of "Mon, 13 May
2024 15:15:50 +0200")
Message-ID: <jwvv83hvo8f.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN>
References: <87h6gynx49.fsf@HIDDEN> <jwvv83nytb9.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN>
<87o79c8n60.fsf@HIDDEN> <jwvo79awixb.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN>
<87zfst4zuh.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Mon, 13 May 2024 09:26:31 -0400
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-SPAM-INFO: Spam detection results: 0
ALL_TRUSTED -1 Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP
AWL -0.038 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
DKIM_SIGNED 0.1 Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
DKIM_VALID -0.1 Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
DKIM_VALID_AU -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's
domain
DKIM_VALID_EF -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from envelope-from
domain
X-SPAM-LEVEL:
X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---)
>>>> Could it be that part of the problem is that the insertion of
>>>> a radio-button widget into a radio-button-choice widget is done "too
>>>> late", i.e. after the radio-button-choice widget has been printed?
>>> To avoid this I suspect that the radio-button-choice widget would have
>>> to be redesigned, and also the checklist widget, which has a similar
>>> issue.
>> What does "this" refer to?"
> I meant the "too late" insertion of radio buttons into
> radio-button-choice widgets (and likewise of checkboxes into checklist
> widgets), because IIUC the way this is currently done (by
> widget-radio-add-item and widget-checklist-add-item, respectively)
> requires that the container widget is already in the buffer.
Then maybe widgets which expect to be filled after they're created
should make sure they have an additional character at the beginning and
another at the end so insertions "inside" don't get confused from
insertions "right before" or "right after".
Stefan
X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#69941: 30.0.50; Faulty fontification of radio button widgets
Resent-From: Stefan Monnier <monnier@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Mon, 13 May 2024 13:30:03 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.69941.B69941.17156069596358 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 69941
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords:
To: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN>
Cc: 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Received: via spool by 69941-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B69941.17156069596358
(code B ref 69941); Mon, 13 May 2024 13:30:03 +0000
Received: (at 69941) by debbugs.gnu.org; 13 May 2024 13:29:19 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:32768 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1s6Vjx-0001eU-M0
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 13 May 2024 09:29:18 -0400
Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:58484)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <monnier@HIDDEN>) id 1s6Vji-0001eH-DS
for 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 13 May 2024 09:29:15 -0400
Received: from pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 85E818092E;
Mon, 13 May 2024 09:28:56 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca;
s=mail; t=1715606935;
bh=kOMxgBbIje2PcDRBIwAut52C7vixBTzQq91PeRNrvGs=;
h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From;
b=fRJk+gXJqb3iCSC8CKOFBW9wTR75fDupBwWCzEiKl2kCINY3hRJnx9CUebfUkufFX
XEUojRttnU0bFABYA9yawLZzyq0+RSZcV3tZVQSTEQ1xD4vy4Q/PAp7BIJycpraKjc
MladnmbAQtJ+4lJLUmsmvfYK1PXKiDhwNjEiCwrGs/N1njNxAjG7IUxWQ8w5G/6b85
12jiBCw2yNEKF51hp2XktlLQHb62/nmQd7X0S994Ta84XtKniCWnlvvz0gB4RsmnoH
ycCQ89CmckXgOXFqBU3tOcFAdId7Q1yBVcqU9oPOd8y14GdzqBqmWV+/QA5A/2Cbit
l4G25PL3NqIPA==
Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1])
by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 5868E80822;
Mon, 13 May 2024 09:28:55 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from pastel (unknown [45.72.201.215])
by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 373701203DF;
Mon, 13 May 2024 09:28:55 -0400 (EDT)
From: Stefan Monnier <monnier@HIDDEN>
In-Reply-To: <jwvv83hvo8f.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN> (Stefan Monnier's message
of "Mon, 13 May 2024 09:26:31 -0400")
Message-ID: <jwvpltpvo2g.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN>
References: <87h6gynx49.fsf@HIDDEN> <jwvv83nytb9.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN>
<87o79c8n60.fsf@HIDDEN> <jwvo79awixb.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN>
<87zfst4zuh.fsf@HIDDEN> <jwvv83hvo8f.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN>
Date: Mon, 13 May 2024 09:28:54 -0400
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-SPAM-INFO: Spam detection results: 0
ALL_TRUSTED -1 Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP
AWL -0.038 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
DKIM_SIGNED 0.1 Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
DKIM_VALID -0.1 Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
DKIM_VALID_AU -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's
domain
DKIM_VALID_EF -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from envelope-from
domain
X-SPAM-LEVEL:
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---)
>> I meant the "too late" insertion of radio buttons into
>> radio-button-choice widgets (and likewise of checkboxes into checklist
>> widgets), because IIUC the way this is currently done (by
>> widget-radio-add-item and widget-checklist-add-item, respectively)
>> requires that the container widget is already in the buffer.
>
> Then maybe widgets which expect to be filled after they're created
> should make sure they have an additional character at the beginning and
> another at the end so insertions "inside" don't get confused from
> insertions "right before" or "right after".
Or maybe `widget-*-add-item` should temporarily change the insertion
type of the from/to markers?
Stefan
X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#69941: 30.0.50; Faulty fontification of radio button widgets
Resent-From: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Mon, 13 May 2024 13:55:01 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.69941.B69941.17156084497183 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 69941
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords:
To: Stefan Monnier <monnier@HIDDEN>
Cc: 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Received: via spool by 69941-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B69941.17156084497183
(code B ref 69941); Mon, 13 May 2024 13:55:01 +0000
Received: (at 69941) by debbugs.gnu.org; 13 May 2024 13:54:09 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:32882 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1s6W80-0001rn-Q1
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 13 May 2024 09:54:09 -0400
Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.19]:43213)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <stephen.berman@HIDDEN>) id 1s6W7x-0001rQ-Ew
for 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 13 May 2024 09:54:07 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmx.net;
s=s31663417; t=1715608436; x=1716213236; i=stephen.berman@HIDDEN;
bh=sMb8MAyxOIIKdXeoMTUpEavQK8aCoMFiDqjaDTjkU2Q=;
h=X-UI-Sender-Class:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:
Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:cc:content-transfer-encoding:
content-type:date:from:message-id:mime-version:reply-to:subject:
to;
b=Pk40CLOZQTzyjaG/+GDvJ3yuJtPZplmSEAhWqBaH18rXC1bDvcYo+AaxfwJV5WXj
GOCR+P6wyzXV1ykwl1rNIefZVPsdchzw98zAkp75Yl3oZxCNfJd9m2lrO3w+2f+2P
qkPXzAJQkLQN7pS3g7w8Ufjgv5E7FcLJenho24NfPkxR8rGLKy6mc+AlQbC/zMWHx
PVQROviBtIeJ6hGMx1ne8hhtPiynhn2AdxlJIIgWRo8x26QU/Hh7M3GjLIJ7NlEM7
AAbLAI05cXYg54UwnnK11Xx619xOPS38fHOPMU5t6WWC6+2fAhHSuiVUqogP1N+ha
zv5PpmaE2Ml+lPkIqA==
X-UI-Sender-Class: 724b4f7f-cbec-4199-ad4e-598c01a50d3a
Received: from strobelfs ([94.134.95.151]) by mail.gmx.net (mrgmx004
[212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MhD2O-1sjgQL3Z4c-00hfIJ; Mon, 13
May 2024 15:53:55 +0200
From: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN>
In-Reply-To: <jwvpltpvo2g.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN> (Stefan Monnier's message
of "Mon, 13 May 2024 09:28:54 -0400")
References: <87h6gynx49.fsf@HIDDEN> <jwvv83nytb9.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN>
<87o79c8n60.fsf@HIDDEN> <jwvo79awixb.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN>
<87zfst4zuh.fsf@HIDDEN> <jwvv83hvo8f.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN>
<jwvpltpvo2g.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN>
Date: Mon, 13 May 2024 15:53:54 +0200
Message-ID: <87v83h4y31.fsf@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:09jy+VBFUXzG7wgDB0RFSCvBvCdi4Vc2EUUFF8b74kVlu8YsfdX
p4SswbMegrFwqr9hstqmU3ANrJav1I72XLYxMXu6KOL0UQt09AXCQqmWlTxacY57QILEtJw
Ad0UpdpKXIuUmC9Y0ImF0RUXZ8nlXneludnJlgArKUGyZqxVPQhDF0Qkk89QCL5Sqklfyts
wdZn+IvO2bRhiSCWJiIgQ==
X-Spam-Flag: NO
UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:durF7ie02HU=;TttKmhHk3RRRXbKL/Va+CVWLenL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X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-)
On Mon, 13 May 2024 09:28:54 -0400 Stefan Monnier <monnier@HIDDEN> wrote:
>>> I meant the "too late" insertion of radio buttons into
>>> radio-button-choice widgets (and likewise of checkboxes into checklist
>>> widgets), because IIUC the way this is currently done (by
>>> widget-radio-add-item and widget-checklist-add-item, respectively)
>>> requires that the container widget is already in the buffer.
>>
>> Then maybe widgets which expect to be filled after they're created
>> should make sure they have an additional character at the beginning and
>> another at the end so insertions "inside" don't get confused from
>> insertions "right before" or "right after".
Something like with editable-field widgets (cf. commit 3bff434b8:
"Document need to put some text before the %v escape in :format
string")? Wouldn't that complicate the display these widgets,
e.g. forcing a corresponding offset of all radio buttons or checkboxes
in order to align with the first one?
> Or maybe `widget-*-add-item` should temporarily change the insertion
> type of the from/to markers?
What do you mean by "temporarily"? Recall the problem that prompted my
OP in this bug is the misfontification of the first radio button in a
deactivated radio-button-choice widget, and the deactivation can happen
any time, long after the widget and its children haven been created.
Maybe it could be left up to the deactivation code to ensure that the
radio-button-choice widget's :from and the :from of its first child
coincide when deactivation (and accompanying fontification) occurs, and
then reset the previous values afterwards. Though that seems pretty ad
hoc... (and would resetting the :from affect the fontification?)
Steve Berman
X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#69941: 30.0.50; Faulty fontification of radio button widgets
Resent-From: Stefan Monnier <monnier@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Mon, 13 May 2024 14:20:02 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.69941.B69941.171560999519002 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 69941
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords:
To: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN>
Cc: 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Received: via spool by 69941-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B69941.171560999519002
(code B ref 69941); Mon, 13 May 2024 14:20:02 +0000
Received: (at 69941) by debbugs.gnu.org; 13 May 2024 14:19:55 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33009 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1s6WWx-0004wQ-HM
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 13 May 2024 10:19:55 -0400
Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:43917)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <monnier@HIDDEN>) id 1s6WWv-0004wG-Df
for 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 13 May 2024 10:19:54 -0400
Received: from pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 2BDF1100061;
Mon, 13 May 2024 10:19:46 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca;
s=mail; t=1715609985;
bh=EiCn0uBIvI8E2yKXzR+5Hc1N/tBmBlEU4+JNNnXzKTs=;
h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From;
b=KWQV0NtzVPcxx4ODtR22ulc8m6a1fyu/R0r1i/g2i3Xze4Xtebo9pI266TZIHkq0F
9wOuDznyUV4mIQcYYIMdlrCVTwk57x/LNFEbtRM6oDoK4mTFCIRq/UZwpsmAu+A4qV
oq9NR8tvAVC95aCUABzdmtM6GhFnASV7h+CaQe4hgTmKD87H4dVUTZsBY2+hxWxSyY
kyxkZk3girG/wb0LrRC5pdh+1C4M1aYniRWshJNCY0EW2rxelG6t1vMkOW/tayxNYd
oEnwgY3MNvaUEI6SO3OSA9WZnKC9LLgUJrUl9p4Y57ty9OW7rL54Z3uy0aAvOzqru3
a3EJ+L3Eiz2Hw==
Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1])
by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 136EF100035;
Mon, 13 May 2024 10:19:45 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from pastel (unknown [45.72.201.215])
by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AA3C3120646;
Mon, 13 May 2024 10:19:44 -0400 (EDT)
From: Stefan Monnier <monnier@HIDDEN>
In-Reply-To: <87v83h4y31.fsf@HIDDEN> (Stephen Berman's message of "Mon, 13 May
2024 15:53:54 +0200")
Message-ID: <jwveda5vlzf.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN>
References: <87h6gynx49.fsf@HIDDEN> <jwvv83nytb9.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN>
<87o79c8n60.fsf@HIDDEN> <jwvo79awixb.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN>
<87zfst4zuh.fsf@HIDDEN> <jwvv83hvo8f.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN>
<jwvpltpvo2g.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN> <87v83h4y31.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Mon, 13 May 2024 10:19:43 -0400
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-SPAM-INFO: Spam detection results: 0
ALL_TRUSTED -1 Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP
AWL -0.011 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
DKIM_SIGNED 0.1 Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
DKIM_VALID -0.1 Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
DKIM_VALID_AU -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's
domain
DKIM_VALID_EF -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from envelope-from
domain
X-SPAM-LEVEL:
X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---)
>> Or maybe `widget-*-add-item` should temporarily change the insertion
>> type of the from/to markers?
> What do you mean by "temporarily"?
I think you underestimated the meaning of:
I'm really not familiar with the widget code
I put "really" before the "not", because I know very little about
that code.
> Maybe it could be left up to the deactivation code to ensure that the
> radio-button-choice widget's :from and the :from of its first child
> coincide when deactivation (and accompanying fontification) occurs, and
> then reset the previous values afterwards.
I suspect thinking in terms of "activation/deactivation" will not
be helpful. We should look at the code which does the insertion of text
(which presumably happens, among other things, upon deactivation).
> Though that seems pretty ad hoc...
If needed, we might be able to make it less ad-hoc by defining
a function for the purpose of (re)inserting text inside an
existing widget.
> (and would resetting the :from affect the fontification?)
It'd be up to that new function to make sure things work as they should.
Stefan
X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#69941: 30.0.50; Faulty fontification of radio button widgets
Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Sat, 25 May 2024 07:52:02 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.69941.B69941.171662348526826 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 69941
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords:
To: Stefan Monnier <monnier@HIDDEN>
Cc: 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, stephen.berman@HIDDEN
Received: via spool by 69941-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B69941.171662348526826
(code B ref 69941); Sat, 25 May 2024 07:52:02 +0000
Received: (at 69941) by debbugs.gnu.org; 25 May 2024 07:51:25 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:41892 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1sAmBZ-0006yc-7q
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 25 May 2024 03:51:25 -0400
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:41210)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1sAmBX-0006yW-0E
for 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 25 May 2024 03:51:23 -0400
Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e])
by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>)
id 1sAmBK-0008KW-5I; Sat, 25 May 2024 03:51:10 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org;
s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date:
mime-version; bh=NkfqiGcGkxv/vxt3/7uBvr7tSexDDYxgX5FMkMbT1mI=; b=cxgKQYIJlyj3
N4GRulUZayzEUDrX214Oj2wP7kXmNzownjWWVCGLXs2r5xSBYC0J36p6P7xFcBu7VDlFar4z11zkI
LWBujaXf6ADis2ouRCNcPFHSIplrmHVEOf3yu/tdkQI4y0Sh0H98ToW/7wWv8iIHbHZ1K+XOcEGTA
3TzLGaeeMll0a4QOH9GrAE3pTSO3vbpydnU+H2bnknl7qaD2ijEJ0DNc8qivod2OKfYG6SdB5H5rs
bLvFhwgnA+GM8fW5PAGtZ4Cy9X9oN0jtEegFMErikYGAf4s+DWU/kVltgAaKvGx8RX4TqVjD8ju6m
xAt985fZ7nAnCb9lLSj09g==;
Date: Sat, 25 May 2024 10:51:08 +0300
Message-Id: <86zfsez5w3.fsf@HIDDEN>
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
In-Reply-To: <jwveda5vlzf.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN> (bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN)
References: <87h6gynx49.fsf@HIDDEN> <jwvv83nytb9.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN>
<87o79c8n60.fsf@HIDDEN> <jwvo79awixb.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN>
<87zfst4zuh.fsf@HIDDEN> <jwvv83hvo8f.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN>
<jwvpltpvo2g.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN> <87v83h4y31.fsf@HIDDEN>
<jwveda5vlzf.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN>
X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---)
Ping! Any further comments about this, or changes to install?
> Cc: 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Mon, 13 May 2024 10:19:43 -0400
> From: Stefan Monnier via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs,
> the Swiss army knife of text editors" <bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN>
>
> >> Or maybe `widget-*-add-item` should temporarily change the insertion
> >> type of the from/to markers?
> > What do you mean by "temporarily"?
>
> I think you underestimated the meaning of:
>
> I'm really not familiar with the widget code
>
> I put "really" before the "not", because I know very little about
> that code.
>
> > Maybe it could be left up to the deactivation code to ensure that the
> > radio-button-choice widget's :from and the :from of its first child
> > coincide when deactivation (and accompanying fontification) occurs, and
> > then reset the previous values afterwards.
>
> I suspect thinking in terms of "activation/deactivation" will not
> be helpful. We should look at the code which does the insertion of text
> (which presumably happens, among other things, upon deactivation).
>
> > Though that seems pretty ad hoc...
>
> If needed, we might be able to make it less ad-hoc by defining
> a function for the purpose of (re)inserting text inside an
> existing widget.
>
> > (and would resetting the :from affect the fontification?)
>
> It'd be up to that new function to make sure things work as they should.
>
>
> Stefan
>
>
>
>
>
X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#69941: 30.0.50; Faulty fontification of radio button widgets
Resent-From: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Sat, 25 May 2024 09:31:02 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.69941.B69941.171662945519462 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 69941
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords:
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
Cc: 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Stefan Monnier <monnier@HIDDEN>
Received: via spool by 69941-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B69941.171662945519462
(code B ref 69941); Sat, 25 May 2024 09:31:02 +0000
Received: (at 69941) by debbugs.gnu.org; 25 May 2024 09:30:55 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:42350 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1sAnjq-00053q-GY
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 25 May 2024 05:30:54 -0400
Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.19]:55439)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <stephen.berman@HIDDEN>) id 1sAnje-00053i-9j
for 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 25 May 2024 05:30:52 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmx.net;
s=s31663417; t=1716629424; x=1717234224; i=stephen.berman@HIDDEN;
bh=IQ/maz2/ThbfPetmgMClxRHEO0rNKMohlJicwMN7920=;
h=X-UI-Sender-Class:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:
Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:cc:
content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:message-id:
mime-version:reply-to:subject:to;
b=KjzHYh20lUCQlkhvhEJj7u6PIG1o1jo5AgWRV2puG7AUmncosVoAxZf5G/0Otcy+
oJCiD0ae/4YIVV04w5Wj1cCndBDOsEHdGgdBS+CUTtBEaowr+13KCX1nGX2ayig9t
Acs0hH1qEJGx7CZdoVil2V0c5COaxrYxNaDG0LkT1aQueLDOCx7c5A/ywTd+zYw/2
3K2ZkhC4uVtySSL45h98Wew9QAf0YmVHd+0UTfagEX/vJqgFDgrlBGn2jiRpRv7jR
Rr/m2iTAleaz65QVX7Pz7c9fuleJqI/UnYM/7/P2bOBp2e6DIfCzZYtjKLbEpvAJX
T736aN/2M3OaHa5J2g==
X-UI-Sender-Class: 724b4f7f-cbec-4199-ad4e-598c01a50d3a
Received: from strobelfs ([94.134.95.181]) by mail.gmx.net (mrgmx005
[212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MTiPv-1s52yr2tuH-00U65s; Sat, 25
May 2024 11:30:24 +0200
From: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@HIDDEN>
In-Reply-To: <86zfsez5w3.fsf@HIDDEN> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Sat, 25 May
2024 10:51:08 +0300")
References: <87h6gynx49.fsf@HIDDEN> <jwvv83nytb9.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN>
<87o79c8n60.fsf@HIDDEN> <jwvo79awixb.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN>
<87zfst4zuh.fsf@HIDDEN> <jwvv83hvo8f.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN>
<jwvpltpvo2g.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN> <87v83h4y31.fsf@HIDDEN>
<jwveda5vlzf.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN> <86zfsez5w3.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Sat, 25 May 2024 11:30:23 +0200
Message-ID: <874jam9r2o.fsf@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:cHE76IHJ7dbHUY2Q4NNuRRVnVF9aBOES0JISANOgNu3V5qEc/Fw
NWTivRh05idFVz8eYsKHO47mIImkKgDWApv6v80esnGVmfFZuqzBt5XlRRWX79Umk4k2bJy
/DBhpAavK5C1K9g1/iRE9/y8WeFJ78SyiF1UH0k+8pmeQ1ohs4jYNN2iCvBiKXFJMbNwd0T
5LoosUP2nB0xK1GDFLffw==
X-Spam-Flag: NO
UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:VFYEnUzGWUU=;MTAYb1zJWwbJeZqU11Q9Ytbtgn4
3f+1+ZKPUJh2uizzWdg/JG6Rk4CbOVbhrFjHuYZRQC3FHUYUuaB1radOPKEWJxxqCwPk2e+ZY
J3gr0ICiqW9xB/xZh1bOQ2+m3iA3bRphq9LoANuggutTiXrEbb042ARzuiyIToRTXClRbsGlT
yt1PyL6suN5D/QkKr08bJg1JAGy7g6h5rId/YHx0e85acmyWnAkeDu8hVJg5UcX+YHLd10/kn
vK/tKyEEWYMA7pPvQjz+x2vvrMdmsBBwxs8+eZvImb0AUtXpqeh8lRUINJBVPDkEDS16b70Gm
caHRipF5grlzcNKf/IQaP0R7KDffz+VMCozqoTyItShe1NAsEuyEoF9CwSdQIpsCSg/R+ifjb
ex7rE0wJClFTQk8cU4PbatzCJVy0lWzqLJonlXvR+g/murT0qxurQDQ7NCFzj8n+cKgFXuxVK
I5Y+3PompvVTp0xuvqG8hQwWeTze0JQF6Np1NWlrU8J5C9K3CM1O5lUhNpaiY9192u5qcSRXP
CsGcv8tWzpEjsvshkAfxOYE7YeFSRk7L2T0pbpxZiGf5MD8E7Nv3Fyu+Nrv2FFDlsXDDNVr5V
8K4bnq5Ns4U0N8RKBf0RbWnkfACIXWpIPGl4JAa6GFQoflul3RzJkheu18Cg7ICHEFHD4qgIj
eKajlyzlwuyvHHDBvSEgI/I2YWfIpA+P/IOvsy2MbT9pH7yatYjEVEnjj4/3rRTokSoi5TV/2
wlDoAdnziVAMvzqebPKQYq15KNRxzV0bY1Zg/wxR1LBdL/9N2gTheum5Hif0CLyGrUi/k4qbO
43BjmIX4muNjlGkVsdpH6Ejpr/hSdg42r3X0jcGrgySTE=
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: 3.6 (+++)
X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org",
has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original
message has been attached to this so you can view it or label
similar future email. If you have any questions, see
the administrator of that system for details.
Content preview: On Sat, 25 May 2024 10:51:08 +0300 Eli Zaretskii wrote: >
Ping! Any further comments about this, or changes to install? I haven't been
able to pursue Stefan's suggestions yet. For the use case for which I made
the patch, I find the results overall better than without it. Nevertheless,
text inserted in front of the firs [...]
Content analysis details: (3.6 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
-0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2 RBL: Average reputation (+2)
[212.227.15.19 listed in wl.mailspike.net]
3.6 RCVD_IN_SBL_CSS RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus SBL-CSS
[94.134.95.181 listed in zen.spamhaus.org]
0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail
provider (stephen.berman[at]gmx.net)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: 1.9 (+)
X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org",
has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original
message has been attached to this so you can view it or label
similar future email. If you have any questions, see
the administrator of that system for details.
Content preview: On Sat, 25 May 2024 10:51:08 +0300 Eli Zaretskii wrote: >
Ping! Any further comments about this, or changes to install? I haven't been
able to pursue Stefan's suggestions yet. For the use case for which I made
the patch, I find the results overall better than without it. Nevertheless,
text inserted in front of the firs [...]
Content analysis details: (1.9 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
-0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2 RBL: Average reputation (+2)
[212.227.15.19 listed in wl.mailspike.net]
3.6 RCVD_IN_SBL_CSS RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus SBL-CSS
[94.134.95.181 listed in zen.spamhaus.org]
-0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
low trust
[212.227.15.19 listed in list.dnswl.org]
0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail
provider (stephen.berman[at]gmx.net)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
-1.0 MAILING_LIST_MULTI Multiple indicators imply a widely-seen list
manager
On Sat, 25 May 2024 10:51:08 +0300 Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN> wrote:
> Ping! Any further comments about this, or changes to install?
I haven't been able to pursue Stefan's suggestions yet. For the use
case for which I made the patch, I find the results overall better than
without it. Nevertheless, text inserted in front of the first radio
button unintentionally getting fontified with widget-inactive face is a
clear bug, so I think the patch should not be installed; I hope I (or
someone else) can improve it.
Steve Berman
>> Cc: 69941 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
>> Date: Mon, 13 May 2024 10:19:43 -0400
>> From: Stefan Monnier via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs,
>> the Swiss army knife of text editors" <bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN>
>>
>> >> Or maybe `widget-*-add-item` should temporarily change the insertion
>> >> type of the from/to markers?
>> > What do you mean by "temporarily"?
>>
>> I think you underestimated the meaning of:
>>
>> I'm really not familiar with the widget code
>>
>> I put "really" before the "not", because I know very little about
>> that code.
>>
>> > Maybe it could be left up to the deactivation code to ensure that the
>> > radio-button-choice widget's :from and the :from of its first child
>> > coincide when deactivation (and accompanying fontification) occurs, a=
nd
>> > then reset the previous values afterwards.
>>
>> I suspect thinking in terms of "activation/deactivation" will not
>> be helpful. We should look at the code which does the insertion of tex=
t
>> (which presumably happens, among other things, upon deactivation).
>>
>> > Though that seems pretty ad hoc...
>>
>> If needed, we might be able to make it less ad-hoc by defining
>> a function for the purpose of (re)inserting text inside an
>> existing widget.
>>
>> > (and would resetting the :from affect the fontification?)
>>
>> It'd be up to that new function to make sure things work as they should=
.
>>
>>
>> Stefan
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.