|
From: | Andreas Röhler |
Subject: | Re: Certain numbers of special forms cause changing behaviour on function calls in --batch |
Date: | Thu, 30 Jun 2016 19:20:50 +0200 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/45.1.0 |
On 30.06.2016 17:13, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
From: Andreas Röhler <address@hidden> Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 07:58:57 +0200 Cc: Wilfred Hughes <address@hidden> A plausible guess. `move-end-of-line' is obviously designed for interactive use. It deals with var `line-move-visual' for example.If that's the reason, setting line-move-visual to nil in the interactive session will produce the same "buggy" behavior. Does it?Are there reasons not to employ `end-of-line'?Compare their doc strings, and you will see the reason. One moves to the visual end, the other to the logical end. This bug, whatever it is, will not be solved by guessing. It will be solved by a reproducible recipe and debugging.
AFAIU parts of the display engine obviously work different in batch mode At http://debbugs.gnu.org/db/16/16853.html it reads: " The point of the example was to show that pos-visible-in-window-p doesn't work normally in batch mode. " Not sure if that must be a bug. It might make sense and being the purpose of batch, not to provide real buffer visibility.Hence a visual line might not exist for the very same reasons then - at least if I had to design a batch mode ;)
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |