[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Unbalanced change hooks (part 2)

From: Phillip Lord
Subject: Re: Unbalanced change hooks (part 2)
Date: Fri, 02 Sep 2016 12:34:38 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1 (gnu/linux)

Stefan Monnier <address@hidden> writes:

>> Okay, yes, I understand now, and yes, this should be conservative, in
>> the sense that it works for all changes, I guess. We are making the
>> assumption here that "start" is always consistent between b-c-f and
>> a-c-f,
> No, we don't make such an assumption either.  The assumption we make is
> that the region passed to a-c-f is within the region passed to b-c-f
> (i.e. is tighter).

Let me rephrase. Can I make the assumption that start is consistent? If
not I need to check to see whether they are inconsistent.

I'm testing the code out at the moment. My test cases work anyway, but
it will take more use in practice until I am confident.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]