* bug#46701: [PATCH] small cleanups related to `unlock-buffer'
@ 2021-02-22 4:18 Matt Armstrong
2021-02-22 16:27 ` Eli Zaretskii
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Matt Armstrong @ 2021-02-22 4:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 46701
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 128 bytes --]
Two patches here, each removing code that has no effect or discernable
purpose. I found these while working on a related bug.
[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #2: Remove unecessary `unlock-buffer' calls. --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 1500 bytes --]
From da42de650842b2d05da42bbbef9e61e8a747b1ff Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Matt Armstrong <matt@rfc20.org>
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2021 16:47:18 -0800
Subject: [PATCH 1/4] Remove unecessary (unlock-buffer) calls.
* lisp/type-break.el (type-break-mode): Remove an (unlock-buffer) call
implied by (set-buffer-modified nil).
* lisp/simple.el (primitive-undo): ditto.
---
lisp/simple.el | 2 --
lisp/type-break.el | 1 -
2 files changed, 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lisp/simple.el b/lisp/simple.el
index 26710e6d53..4f5a9c5e83 100644
--- a/lisp/simple.el
+++ b/lisp/simple.el
@@ -3041,8 +3041,6 @@ primitive-undo
(and (consp time)
(equal (list (car time) (cdr time))
(visited-file-modtime))))
- (when (fboundp 'unlock-buffer)
- (unlock-buffer))
(set-buffer-modified-p nil)))
;; Element (nil PROP VAL BEG . END) is property change.
(`(nil . ,(or `(,prop ,val ,beg . ,end) pcase--dontcare))
diff --git a/lisp/type-break.el b/lisp/type-break.el
index a6d5cd0170..984256d3ce 100644
--- a/lisp/type-break.el
+++ b/lisp/type-break.el
@@ -395,7 +395,6 @@ type-break-mode
(with-current-buffer (find-file-noselect type-break-file-name
'nowarn)
(set-buffer-modified-p nil)
- (unlock-buffer)
(kill-current-buffer))))))
(define-minor-mode type-break-mode-line-message-mode
--
2.30.0
[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #3: Remove unecessary let bind. --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 1063 bytes --]
From 52c83a2d059ee2e3a22fd5c1e3eece13af169586 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Matt Armstrong <matt@rfc20.org>
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2021 16:36:39 -0800
Subject: [PATCH 2/4] Remove unecessary `buffer-file-name' let bind.
* lisp/files.el (revert-buffer-insert-file-contents--default-function):
Do not bind `buffer-file-name' around call to (unlock-buffer);
it has no effect.
---
lisp/files.el | 7 ++-----
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lisp/files.el b/lisp/files.el
index 68e883513c..962137f18c 100644
--- a/lisp/files.el
+++ b/lisp/files.el
@@ -6234,11 +6234,8 @@ revert-buffer-insert-file-contents--default-function
"Cannot revert unreadable file %s")
file-name))
(t
- ;; Bind buffer-file-name to nil
- ;; so that we don't try to lock the file.
- (let ((buffer-file-name nil))
- (or auto-save-p
- (unlock-buffer)))
+ (unless auto-save-p
+ (unlock-buffer))
(widen)
(let ((coding-system-for-read
;; Auto-saved file should be read by Emacs's
--
2.30.0
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* bug#46701: [PATCH] small cleanups related to `unlock-buffer'
2021-02-22 4:18 bug#46701: [PATCH] small cleanups related to `unlock-buffer' Matt Armstrong
@ 2021-02-22 16:27 ` Eli Zaretskii
2021-02-23 0:56 ` Matt Armstrong
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2021-02-22 16:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Matt Armstrong; +Cc: 46701
> From: Matt Armstrong <matt@rfc20.org>
> Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2021 20:18:44 -0800
>
> Subject: [PATCH 1/4] Remove unecessary (unlock-buffer) calls.
>
> * lisp/type-break.el (type-break-mode): Remove an (unlock-buffer) call
> implied by (set-buffer-modified nil).
> * lisp/simple.el (primitive-undo): ditto.
My reading of the code is that the above is true only if
inhibit-modification-hooks is nil. Otherwise, these calls are not
no-ops.
> --- a/lisp/files.el
> +++ b/lisp/files.el
> @@ -6234,11 +6234,8 @@ revert-buffer-insert-file-contents--default-function
> "Cannot revert unreadable file %s")
> file-name))
> (t
> - ;; Bind buffer-file-name to nil
> - ;; so that we don't try to lock the file.
> - (let ((buffer-file-name nil))
> - (or auto-save-p
> - (unlock-buffer)))
> + (unless auto-save-p
> + (unlock-buffer))
And here, I think we just forgot to update the Lisp code when
unlock-buffer started to look at buffer-file-truename instead of
buffer-file-name. But otherwise, I see no reason why we should remove
the call to unlock-buffer; what did I miss?
Thanks.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* bug#46701: [PATCH] small cleanups related to `unlock-buffer'
2021-02-22 16:27 ` Eli Zaretskii
@ 2021-02-23 0:56 ` Matt Armstrong
2021-02-26 0:45 ` Stefan Kangas
2021-02-27 14:22 ` Eli Zaretskii
0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Matt Armstrong @ 2021-02-23 0:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Eli Zaretskii; +Cc: 46701
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2951 bytes --]
Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>> From: Matt Armstrong <matt@rfc20.org>
>> Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2021 20:18:44 -0800
>>
>> Subject: [PATCH 1/4] Remove unecessary (unlock-buffer) calls.
>>
>> * lisp/type-break.el (type-break-mode): Remove an (unlock-buffer) call
>> implied by (set-buffer-modified nil).
>> * lisp/simple.el (primitive-undo): ditto.
>
> My reading of the code is that the above is true only if
> inhibit-modification-hooks is nil. Otherwise, these calls are not
> no-ops.
Thanks, good catch. I think the change to type-break.el is probably
fine, but I will drop it for now. In simple.el I just removed the
unecessary fboundp check (new patch attached).
>> --- a/lisp/files.el
>> +++ b/lisp/files.el
>> @@ -6234,11 +6234,8 @@ revert-buffer-insert-file-contents--default-function
>> "Cannot revert unreadable file %s")
>> file-name))
>> (t
>> - ;; Bind buffer-file-name to nil
>> - ;; so that we don't try to lock the file.
>> - (let ((buffer-file-name nil))
>> - (or auto-save-p
>> - (unlock-buffer)))
>> + (unless auto-save-p
>> + (unlock-buffer))
>
> And here, I think we just forgot to update the Lisp code when
> unlock-buffer started to look at buffer-file-truename instead of
> buffer-file-name. But otherwise, I see no reason why we should remove
> the call to unlock-buffer; what did I miss?
This is some very old code.
When originally written the `unlock-buffer' was a nop because it was
well before file-buffer-truename existed -- the let bind disabled it.
The let bind was intended to prevent locking the buffer by
`erase-buffer'. See Roland's commit below, which is the first commit
for this file that we've got.
b4da00e92a0 (Roland McGrath 1991-07-19 1804)
;; Bind buffer-file-name to nil
;; so that we don't try to lock the file.
(let ((buffer-file-name nil))
(or auto-save-p
(unlock-buffer))
(erase-buffer))
(insert-file-contents file-name (not auto-save-p))))
A few years later Richard moved the erase logic to insert-file-contents,
but left the no-op call to unlock-buffer. Note that the comment no
longer makes sense.
f9456b0a5b5 (Richard M. Stallman 1994-02-17 2020)
;; Bind buffer-file-name to nil
;; so that we don't try to lock the file.
(let ((buffer-file-name nil))
(or auto-save-p
(unlock-buffer))
(insert-file-contents file-name (not auto-save-p)
nil nil t)))
insert-file-contents has logic to unlock the buffer. I must admit that I
don't understand how that logic works.
When unlock-buffer switched to using buffer-file-tempfile the
unlock-buffer call here became active for the first time, probably by
accident? Removing it now is a possible behavior change, but it
restores the original behavior.
I did a manual test. I edited a file, then changed the file outside
emacs, then ran revert-buffer. The file's lock file was still removed,
even with the patch below applied.
[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #2: 0001-Remove-unecessary-unlock-buffer-call.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 947 bytes --]
From 3b569a6b9139d2b350745bebc64db506728cf994 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Matt Armstrong <matt@rfc20.org>
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2021 16:40:05 -0800
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] Remove unecessary unlock-buffer call.
* lisp/files.el (revert-buffer-insert-file-contents--default-function):
Remove vestigial call to `unlock-buffer'.
---
lisp/files.el | 5 -----
1 file changed, 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lisp/files.el b/lisp/files.el
index 68e883513c..b5d92cd841 100644
--- a/lisp/files.el
+++ b/lisp/files.el
@@ -6234,11 +6234,6 @@ revert-buffer-insert-file-contents--default-function
"Cannot revert unreadable file %s")
file-name))
(t
- ;; Bind buffer-file-name to nil
- ;; so that we don't try to lock the file.
- (let ((buffer-file-name nil))
- (or auto-save-p
- (unlock-buffer)))
(widen)
(let ((coding-system-for-read
;; Auto-saved file should be read by Emacs's
--
2.30.0
[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #3: 0002-Assume-unlock-buffer-is-always-bound.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 980 bytes --]
From dc9cc451e0ab6a84d839f3ed9d1b552da3c43373 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Matt Armstrong <matt@rfc20.org>
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2021 16:41:44 -0800
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] Assume unlock-buffer is always bound.
* lisp/simple.el (primitive-undo): Assume unlock-buffer is always
bound.
---
lisp/simple.el | 3 +--
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lisp/simple.el b/lisp/simple.el
index 1dfc3374ad..c4062d97cc 100644
--- a/lisp/simple.el
+++ b/lisp/simple.el
@@ -3043,8 +3043,7 @@ primitive-undo
(and (consp time)
(equal (list (car time) (cdr time))
(visited-file-modtime))))
- (when (fboundp 'unlock-buffer)
- (unlock-buffer))
+ (unlock-buffer)
(set-buffer-modified-p nil)))
;; Element (nil PROP VAL BEG . END) is property change.
(`(nil . ,(or `(,prop ,val ,beg . ,end) pcase--dontcare))
--
2.30.0
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* bug#46701: [PATCH] small cleanups related to `unlock-buffer'
2021-02-23 0:56 ` Matt Armstrong
@ 2021-02-26 0:45 ` Stefan Kangas
2021-02-27 14:22 ` Eli Zaretskii
1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Stefan Kangas @ 2021-02-26 0:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Matt Armstrong; +Cc: 46701
Matt Armstrong <matt@rfc20.org> writes:
> I did a manual test. I edited a file, then changed the file outside
> emacs, then ran revert-buffer. The file's lock file was still removed,
> even with the patch below applied.
Perhaps we should write some automatic tests before changing anything in
this area?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* bug#46701: [PATCH] small cleanups related to `unlock-buffer'
2021-02-23 0:56 ` Matt Armstrong
2021-02-26 0:45 ` Stefan Kangas
@ 2021-02-27 14:22 ` Eli Zaretskii
2021-02-27 14:24 ` Eli Zaretskii
1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2021-02-27 14:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Matt Armstrong; +Cc: 46701
> From: Matt Armstrong <matt@rfc20.org>
> Cc: 46701@debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2021 16:56:44 -0800
>
> Thanks, good catch. I think the change to type-break.el is probably
> fine, but I will drop it for now. In simple.el I just removed the
> unecessary fboundp check (new patch attached).
Thanks, pushed to the master branch.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* bug#46701: [PATCH] small cleanups related to `unlock-buffer'
2021-02-27 14:22 ` Eli Zaretskii
@ 2021-02-27 14:24 ` Eli Zaretskii
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2021-02-27 14:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: matt; +Cc: 46701-done
> Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2021 16:22:26 +0200
> From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
> Cc: 46701@debbugs.gnu.org
>
> > From: Matt Armstrong <matt@rfc20.org>
> > Cc: 46701@debbugs.gnu.org
> > Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2021 16:56:44 -0800
> >
> > Thanks, good catch. I think the change to type-break.el is probably
> > fine, but I will drop it for now. In simple.el I just removed the
> > unecessary fboundp check (new patch attached).
>
> Thanks, pushed to the master branch.
And with that, I'm closing this bug report.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2021-02-27 14:24 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2021-02-22 4:18 bug#46701: [PATCH] small cleanups related to `unlock-buffer' Matt Armstrong
2021-02-22 16:27 ` Eli Zaretskii
2021-02-23 0:56 ` Matt Armstrong
2021-02-26 0:45 ` Stefan Kangas
2021-02-27 14:22 ` Eli Zaretskii
2021-02-27 14:24 ` Eli Zaretskii
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).