Re: inhibit-eol-conversion affects call-process marking buffers modified

[Gerd Moellmann]

Kenichi Handa <handa@etl.go.jp> writes:

> > Kenichi, could you please check this?  Are there cases where
> > insert_1_both may be called intentionally with NCHARS == 0, maybe
> > for the side effect of moving the gap?
> 
> No.  But, isn't it better to change callproc.c so that it
> doesn't call insert_1_both if NREAD is zero.  Actually, at
> the later code (line 810), we do:
> 
>               if (process_coding.produced > 0)
>                 insert_1_both (decoding_buf, process_coding.produced_char,
>                                process_coding.produced, 0, 1, 0);
> 
> I think changing such very deep function as insert_1_both
> requires much more consideration.

But it has the benefit to capture other such cases.  I'd bet the whole
issue gets forgotten after some days, and one has to debug the next
one, if there is one, from the start.  I've installed it for now, and
let Richard decide if he wants to keep it after Nov 1.

Thanks, Kenichi.