Re: PATCH: make linum.el play nicely with other margin-setting extensions

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: address@hidden (João Távora)
> Cc: address@hidden,  address@hidden
> Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2015 14:19:59 +0000
> 
> Anyway, I say it's "basically the same"" because both patches fail in
> the following situation. The reason is that nlinum.el is not as "noisy"
> as linum.el (as Martin noticed elsewhere in this thread):
> 
>    M-x nlinum-mode   ;; good, line numbers
>    M-x darkroom-mode ;; good, line-numbers + darkroom margins
>    M-x darkroom-mode ;; oops, no line-numbers OR darkroom margins, even
>                      ;; after a bit of scrolling (linum works here)
>    C-x 2             ;; change the window configuration, or force
>                      ;; nlinum--setup-window somehow, and line-numbers
>                      ;; restored
> 
> Also notice Stefan's comment
> 
> -  ;; FIXME: The interaction between different uses of the margin is
> -  ;; problematic.  We should have a way for different packages to indicate 
> (and
> -  ;; change) their preference independently.
> 
> Meaning that we do need to find a way to p *both* nlinum.el and
> darkroom.el to use some kind of ownership-awareness scheme.

IMO, the question is not whether there are still use cases where such
coexistence would be problematic.  The question is whether the
solution in nlinum solves enough problems to adopt it in linum, and
make the life of darkroom mode and similar modes easier.

If the answer is YES, I'd prefer to use Stefan's solution instead of
inventing yet another one that suffers from the same limitations.

We could (and probably should) discuss further measures to improve the
situation afterwards.  But first there should be no reason for linum
to fail to do at least what nlinum does.  Do you agree?

> I'm discussing such a scheme with Martin (and Juanma). 

Thanks.