Hi Carsten, On 14.12.2009 17:27, Carsten Dominik wrote: > i can follow your arguments and would like to improve this. > > What I do not understand yet is this: > > I was under the impression that normally, there is only a single > display table in Emacs, and that is the global one and every buffer > will use it.
Interesting, I had the opposite impression. I'm not exactly sure why though. Maybe from the documentation and name of the variable buffer-display-table? Maybe you had standard-display-table in mind? "Variable: Display table to use for buffers that specify none. See `buffer-display-table' for more information." I have, however, never seen a spelled out convention regarding deep sharing of display tables. > So it would seem to me that whitespace-mode would normally > *make* a local table in order to put its changes in there. However, > that does not seem to be the case here. Can you see why? I think whitespace-mode usually assumes that the local display tables is, well, local. Therefore, no action would be required. I forwarded my original bug-report to Vinicius Jose Latorre (whitespace-mode's maintainer) after you mentioned it would be a whitespace-mode bug. He replied: > Well, the problem was due to the way whitespace deal with > buffer-display-table variable. > > I've just fixed this problem in Emacs CVS and EmacsWiki. Here is the patch: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-diffs/2009-12/msg00184.html He basically creates a deep copy (the copy-sequence line) of the local display table and installs it. This should solve the problem. I still have this nagging feeling that the sharing of the display table is not the right thing to do and would regard the fix in whitespace-mode as a kind of emergence case backup. But this is probably purely a style thing. Thanks for getting back to me on this matter, Martin _______________________________________________ Emacs-orgmode mailing list Please use `Reply All' to send replies to the list. Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
