From: Carl Worth <cworth@cworth.org>
To: Dmitry Kurochkin <dmitry.kurochkin@gmail.com>, notmuch@notmuchmail.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] Fix hiding a message while some citations are shown
	in notmuch-show view.
In-Reply-To: <87hb8ipeb0.fsf@gmail.com>
References: <1306361416-5019-1-git-send-email-dmitry.kurochkin@gmail.com>
	<1306361416-5019-4-git-send-email-dmitry.kurochkin@gmail.com>
	<87oc2qa07g.fsf@yoom.home.cworth.org> <87k4depfyj.fsf@gmail.com>
	<87lixu9z5b.fsf@yoom.home.cworth.org> <87hb8ipeb0.fsf@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Notmuch/0.5 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.3.1
	(i486-pc-linux-gnu)
Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 18:02:49 -0700
Message-ID: <87ipsy9sue.fsf@yoom.home.cworth.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-=";
	micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Precedence: list

--=-=-=
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, 26 May 2011 03:10:11 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin <dmitry.kurochkin@gmai=
l.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 25 May 2011 15:46:40 -0700, Carl Worth <cworth@cworth.org> wrote:
> Well, emacs trunk is not broken :)  The bug is in lisp code, so you can
> fix it in .emacs by redefining `isearch-range-invisible' function.  I do
> that now.

Oh, in that case we can fix this is notmuch emacs lisp by just defining
and using a fixed function. Is the broken function something we're
calling directly? Or is it being called indirectly? (being called by
other emacs lisp code that we are calling)?

If we can incorporate the fix, that would be great.

> Please consider pushing other patches from the series.  They do not fix
> any bug, but do simplify the code.  The last patch uses list for
> invisible overlay property as well.  But it does not break isearch
> because we do not search in hidden messages.

Hmmm... we should probably do that. I'd like isearch in notmuch to
search anything that is hidden.

> BTW would be nice to have a set of known-to-fail tests, i.e. bugs that
> are not fixed yet.  If we had it, the above test could be implemented
> and committed before we have the fix pushed.

We do! Use test_expect_equal_failure (yes, the name is horrible!)
instead of test_expect_equal and you should get what you want.

=2DCarl

=2D-=20
carl.d.worth@intel.com

--=-=-=
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAk3dprkACgkQ6JDdNq8qSWjOZACcChjCFqJrnrrBTSOMoaw4Cxy4
lusAniCy0nJl47gVy+QUvbrMZm0Ijouy
=R0BE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=-=-=--