[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Unbalanced change hooks (part 1)
From: |
Richard Copley |
Subject: |
Re: Unbalanced change hooks (part 1) |
Date: |
Tue, 2 Aug 2016 10:19:47 +0100 |
On 2 August 2016 at 03:34, Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> wrote:
>> From: Richard Copley <address@hidden>
>> Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2016 21:13:01 +0100
>> Cc: Óscar Fuentes <address@hidden>,
>> Emacs Development <address@hidden>
>>
>> > diff --git a/src/fileio.c b/src/fileio.c
>> > index b1f9d3c..0431cbc 100644
>> > --- a/src/fileio.c
>> > +++ b/src/fileio.c
>> > @@ -3440,6 +3440,7 @@ by calling `format-decode', which see. */)
>> > /* SAME_AT_END_CHARPOS counts characters, because
>> > restore_window_points needs the old character count. */
>> > ptrdiff_t same_at_end_charpos = ZV;
>> > + bool run_change_hooks;
>> >
>> > if (current_buffer->base_buffer && ! NILP (visit))
>> > error ("Cannot do file visiting in an indirect buffer");
>> > @@ -4077,7 +4078,9 @@ by calling `format-decode', which see. */)
>> > /* For a special file, all we can do is guess. */
>> > total = READ_BUF_SIZE;
>> >
>> > - if (NILP (visit) && total > 0)
>> > + run_change_hooks = ((NILP (visit) || !NILP (replace))
>> > + && total > 0);
>> > + if (run_change_hooks)
>> > {
>> > if (!NILP (BVAR (current_buffer, file_truename))
>> > /* Make binding buffer-file-name to nil effective. */
>> > @@ -4313,8 +4316,7 @@ by calling `format-decode', which see. */)
>> > /* Call after-change hooks for the inserted text, aside from the case
>> > of normal visiting (not with REPLACE), which is done in a new buffer
>> > "before" the buffer is changed. */
>> > - if (inserted > 0 && total > 0
>> > - && (NILP (visit) || !NILP (replace)))
>> > + if (run_change_hooks)
>> > {
>> > signal_after_change (PT, 0, inserted);
>> > update_compositions (PT, PT, CHECK_BORDER);
>> >
>> >
>> > Unfortunately, this amendment, by itself, doesn't fix #240[79]4, since
>> > there are other causes for the change hooks being improperly invoked.
>> >
>> > --
>> > Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).
>>
>> LGTM. It's hard to imagine anyone relying on the before-change hooks
>> _not_ being run, so it should be safe, at least, to make this change.
>
> That code is almost never run when REPLACE is non-nil, so doing that
> won't help. See an earlier message that explained why.
Thanks Eli, I saw it. It's not the sort of discussion I care to get involved in.