bug#31586: 27.0.50; `frame-title-format' doesn't save match data

[Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com>]

> >> Elisp code
> >> should never presume that the match-data is preserved across something
> >> like sit-for, read-char, or any other function which can run process
> >> filters, redisplay, timers, or contains a yield-point.
> > Is this practical?  We have any number of hooks, advices, and other
> > means to make arbitrary Lisp run almost off any function call.  Given
> > that redisplay can be entered by such Lisp by calling 'redisplay' or
> > 'message' or one of the other functions you mentioned, your suggestion
> > would mean we need to save-match-data around any call to any
> > function.  That would make our code very cluttered, indeed.
> 
> That's how we've lived so far, except that the need for save-match-data
> is not around "any" call, but only around "any call except for <...>"
> where <...> is the set of "primitive enough" functions.  The main
> problem so far is that this set is not formally defined (and also that
> the byte-compiler doesn't warn you if you use a function outside of this
> set without wrapping with save-match-data), but other than that it works
> well in practice, because in 99% there is *very* little code executed
> between a regexp match and the use of the match-data.

Would it make sense to "formalize" this a bit, by having an
explicit such list of the functions (those "primitive enough"
to never, or perhaps hardly ever, need wrapping with `s-m-d')?

Even if such a list were not consulted by any code (and it
could be, presumably, for some control somewhere), it might
at least help developers and users by letting them know what
the story is.

Just a thought.