Nick Roberts wrote:
> In other words: I have seen this bug.
I'm not questioning that you have seen it, just the wisdom of ignoring the
advice of those who are experts in that part of the code and say that it is
dangerous to fix shortly before the release.
I am not ignoring Kim's advice, neither am I ignoring Richard's advice
here. And I have listened to Chong.
If you read my messages carefully you will see why I do not think this
is dangerous to fix the way I have suggested. This is what I wrote to
Kim some hours ago (who if I understand correctly is suspecting that a
slightly different way to fix it is better in the long run):
"The advantage of this way (my fix) is that it is rather safe. In
essence it just switches the value "or-ed" with row->continued_p between
that your a little bit unfortunate patch gave (ie t) and the previous
value (ie nil).
Both these values have been tested for quite a while so it does not look
as there can much stability problems."
Given that you appear to be the only one to have been inconvenienced by this
bug (and how often do you need an overlay at the start of the buffer?) while
probably thousands want to see a release, and thousands more want to see
Unicode added to Emacs, I just find the whole thing absurd. Some things
are worth dying for, but I don't this is one of them.
Oh, good, I am delaying the Unicode release! I did not think of that.
Sorry, I could not really resist. I can understand your frustration,
this makes me frustrated too, but I have tried my best not to delay the
release. I believe the fix I sent today and that Chong turned into
something more well written does what is needed.
_______________________________________________
emacs-pretest-bug mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-pretest-bug
