>>>>> "martin" == martin rudalics <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> (when font-lock-multiline
>>> (setq end (or (text-property-any end (point-max)
>>> 'font-lock-multiline nil)
>>> (point-max)))
>>> (goto-char end)
>>> (setq end (line-beginning-position 2)))
>>> ;; Now do the fontification.
>>
>>
>> I'd rather change jit-lock, since font-lock may be used without jit-lock.
> It would be unsafe to change jit-lock. Currently it is not mandatory
> for a "font-lock-fontify-region-function" to adjust the end of the
> region. delphi-fontify-region, for example, doesn't. It does rely on
> jit-lock-fontify-now to provide correct endpoints. Put this the other
> way round. If font-lock-default-fontify-region's present approach to
> fontify an additional line were indeed mandatory, most current
> font-lock-fontify-region-functions would be invalid since they do not
> adjust the end of the region.
Indeed, you're right. The problem has nothing to do with jit-lock:
font-lock does the same double-rounding even when jit-lock is turned off,
because font-lock-after-change-function also does the rounding.
> Anyway, my first solution should emulate your proposal. It would
> suppress fontification of the second line iff jit-lock is turned on.
> Using font-lock without jit-lock would not change the current behavior:
In light of the above, I think that checking jit-lock-mode is not the
right approach.
How 'bout the patch below instead?
Stefan
--- orig/lisp/font-lock.el
+++ mod/lisp/font-lock.el
@@ -1058,7 +1058,8 @@
'font-lock-multiline nil)
(point-max)))
(goto-char end)
- (setq end (line-beginning-position 2))
+ ;; Round up to a whole line.
+ (unless (bolp) (setq end (line-beginning-position 2)))
;; Now do the fontification.
(font-lock-unfontify-region beg end)
(when font-lock-syntactic-keywords
_______________________________________________
Emacs-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel
