> >> This shows that show-trailing-whitespace is flexible enough to allow > >> arbitrary > >> customization, but escape-glyph is not. There is a need for a buffer-local > >> variable similar to show-trailing-whitespace to enable/disable highlighting > >> of control characters and nbsp with escape-glyph face on a per-buffer > >> basis. > > > > What's wrong with `show-nonbreak-space'? > > I thought that two new face variables (e.g. `escape-glyph-face' and > `nobreak-space-face') would be useful to imitate buffer-local faces. > I guess users might want to use different faces for control characters > or nbsp in different buffers, or to set `escape-glyph-face' to the default > face to not highlight control characters in some buffers.
A "face variable" isn't flexible enough, as it wouldn't allow the "preceeding escape character" variant. As for normal escape-characters, why are they important enough to warrant a separate variable controlling their appearance? Typical "pretty" text doesn't contain them at all (and if they occur, it's an error). -Miles -- Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball. _______________________________________________ Emacs-devel mailing list Emacs-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel
