[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Unbalanced change hooks (part 2)
From: |
Alan Mackenzie |
Subject: |
Re: Unbalanced change hooks (part 2) |
Date: |
Mon, 8 Aug 2016 20:16:13 +0000 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) |
Hello, Stefan
On Mon, Aug 08, 2016 at 03:56:24PM -0400, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> > If it is indeed the case, then a solution to the problem would be to
> > check that before- and after-c-f are called alternately. Any time
> > after-c-f is called twice in a row, we could reverse the change just made
> > (using the undo list), invoke before-c-f, redo the change, then let
> > after-c-f continue to completion. If necessary, we can temporarily
> Sounds like piling up workarounds to make up for a mistake in the
> underlying design.
I couldn't agree more!
Anyway, we've now got what is surely a satisfactory solution: in the
event of a missing call to before-change-functions, assume that the
entirety of the buffer has changed (which is not far from the truth,
given that it happens on a `revert-buffer') and run
c-{before,after}-change on this basis. See the patch in my latest post
to Eli.
This switches off some of the optimisations intended for revert-buffer,
but these seem no longer quite so pressing, given that reverting
xdisp.c, even with my latest patch, takes less than 0.2s on my 7 y.o.
machine; 20 years ago, things would have been different.
> Stefan
--
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).
- Re: Unbalanced change hooks (part 2) [Documentation fix still remaining], (continued)
- Re: Unbalanced change hooks (part 2) [Documentation fix still remaining], Stefan Monnier, 2016/08/19
- Re: Unbalanced change hooks (part 2), Alan Mackenzie, 2016/08/02
- Re: Unbalanced change hooks (part 2), Eli Zaretskii, 2016/08/02
- Re: Unbalanced change hooks (part 2), Alan Mackenzie, 2016/08/07
- Re: Unbalanced change hooks (part 2), Eli Zaretskii, 2016/08/08
- Re: Unbalanced change hooks (part 2), Stefan Monnier, 2016/08/08
- Re: Unbalanced change hooks (part 2),
Alan Mackenzie <=
Re: Unbalanced change hooks (part 2), Alan Mackenzie, 2016/08/09
Re: Unbalanced change hooks (part 2), Phillip Lord, 2016/08/19
Re: Unbalanced change hooks (part 2), Eli Zaretskii, 2016/08/30