>> I volunteer to do both if you agree that it would be an improvement. > > I do agree, any patches would be greatly welcome. Thanks in advance. I have installed the development version of Emacs and made a first patch attempt, preserving the structure of the program as much as possible. I have not tested thoroughly, but it works for all the cases I have tried. I have attached it to this mail, and comment each change below. Let me know what you think. > lisp/menu-bar.el | 4 +-- > lisp/obsolete/mouse-sel.el | 2 +- > lisp/select.el | 70 +++++++++++++++++++++++--------------- > lisp/term/pc-win.el | 2 +- > 5 files changed, 47 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/lisp/menu-bar.el b/lisp/menu-bar.el > index ab64928fe7..01683f5c9f 100644 > --- a/lisp/menu-bar.el > +++ b/lisp/menu-bar.el > @@ -606,8 +606,8 @@ clipboard-yank > "Insert the clipboard contents, or the last stretch of killed text." > (interactive "*") > (let ((select-enable-clipboard t) > - ;; Ensure that we defeat the DWIM login in `gui-selection-value'. > - (gui--last-selected-text-clipboard nil)) > + ;; Ensure that we defeat the DWIM logic in `gui-selection-value'. > + (gui--last-clipboard-selection-fingerprint nil)) > (yank))) > > (defun clipboard-kill-ring-save (beg end &optional region) - DWIM login -> DWIM logic (typo) - replaced gui--last-selected-text-clipboard variable with the new one I have introduced (explained below) - I have tested that clipboard-yank works for the following cases: - (setq select-enable-clipboard nil) -> copy in another program -> clipboard-yank another program. - copy in another program -> C-y -> M-y -> clipboard-yank > diff --git a/lisp/obsolete/mouse-sel.el b/lisp/obsolete/mouse-sel.el > index a9d6bfee60..fc91cc9fc1 100644 > --- a/lisp/obsolete/mouse-sel.el > +++ b/lisp/obsolete/mouse-sel.el > @@ -304,7 +304,7 @@ mouse-sel-get-selection-function > (if (eq selection 'PRIMARY) > (or (gui-selection-value) > (bound-and-true-p x-last-selected-text-primary) > - gui--last-selected-text-primary) > + gui--last-selected-text-primary) ;; this variable no longer exists. Does code in lisp/obsolete/ need to be mantained? > (gui-get-selection selection))) > "Function to call to get the selection. > Called with one argument: Here I have not replaced the variable, since I have assumed that code under the obsolete/ directory does not need to be maintained, and C-h f tells me that function is not loaded by default. However there is a warning when compiling. Should I fix it? > diff --git a/lisp/select.el b/lisp/select.el > index 42b50c44e6..55c409d347 100644 > --- a/lisp/select.el > +++ b/lisp/select.el > @@ -25,9 +25,10 @@ > ;; Based partially on earlier release by Lucid. > > ;; The functionality here is divided in two parts: > -;; - Low-level: gui-get-selection, gui-set-selection, gui-selection-owner-p, > -;; gui-selection-exists-p are the backend-dependent functions meant to access > -;; various kinds of selections (CLIPBOARD, PRIMARY, SECONDARY). > +;; - Low-level: gui-backend-get-selection, gui-backend-set-selection, > +;; gui-backend-selection-owner-p, gui-backend-selection-exists-p are > +;; the backend-dependent functions meant to access various kinds of > +;; selections (CLIPBOARD, PRIMARY, SECONDARY). > ;; - Higher-level: gui-select-text and gui-selection-value go together to > ;; access the general notion of "GUI selection" for interoperation with other > ;; applications. This can use either the clipboard or the primary selection, - gui-selection-owner-p -> gui-backend-selection-owner-p (the former does not exist) - gui-selection-exists-p -> gui-backend-selection-exists-p (the former does not exist) - gui-get-selection -> gui-backend-get-selection (the former does exist, but the later is lower lever, and I assumed that if the previous needed to be updated this one probably too) - gui-set-selection -> gui-backend-set-selection (same as above) > @@ -108,16 +109,24 @@ select-enable-primary > :group 'killing > :version "25.1") > > -;; We keep track of the last text selected here, so we can check the > -;; current selection against it, and avoid passing back our own text > -;; from gui-selection-value. We track both > +;; We keep track of the last selection here, so we can check the > +;; current selection against it, and avoid passing back with > +;; gui-selection-value the same text we previously killed or > +;; yanked. We track both > ;; separately in case another X application only sets one of them > ;; we aren't fooled by the PRIMARY or CLIPBOARD selection staying the same. > +;; > +;; TODO: add selection owner to fingerprint, since timestamp is not > +;; always relieable? Probably not worth it, since right now we can't > +;; get the owner with the low-level functions out of the box, and text > +;; plus timestamp is probably a strong enough fingerprint already. > +(defvar gui--last-clipboard-selection-fingerprint nil > + "The fingerprint of the CLIPBOARD selection last seen, which is a > +list of value and timestamp.") > +(defvar gui--last-primary-selection-fingerprint nil > + "The fingerprint of the PRIMARY selection last seen, which is a > +list of value and timestamp.") > > -(defvar gui--last-selected-text-clipboard nil > - "The value of the CLIPBOARD selection last seen.") > -(defvar gui--last-selected-text-primary nil > - "The value of the PRIMARY selection last seen.") > > (defun gui-select-text (text) > "Select TEXT, a string, according to the window system. - Using new variables gui--last-clipboard-selection-fingerprint and gui--last-primary-selection-fingerprint instead of gui--last-selected-text-clipboard and gui--last-selected-text-primary. They have the same purpose but hold the text and the timestamp instead of just the text, and I have updated the code everywhere they were referenced to use the text-timestamp pair instead of just the text . Better ideas for the names are welcome. - Updated previous comment - Just threw the idea that a better fingerprint would include the owner of the selection, if timestamps are sometimes not updated precisely when the owner changes, as Po Lu said. > @@ -127,14 +136,16 @@ gui-select-text > MS-Windows does not have a \"primary\" selection." > (when select-enable-primary > (gui-set-selection 'PRIMARY text) > - (setq gui--last-selected-text-primary text)) > + (setq gui--last-primary-selection-fingerprint > + (list text (gui-get-selection 'PRIMARY 'TIMESTAMP)))) > (when select-enable-clipboard > ;; When cutting, the selection is cleared and PRIMARY > ;; set to the empty string. Prevent that, PRIMARY > ;; should not be reset by cut (Bug#16382). > (setq saved-region-selection text) > (gui-set-selection 'CLIPBOARD text) > - (setq gui--last-selected-text-clipboard text))) > + (setq gui--last-clipboard-selection-fingerprint > + (list text (gui-get-selection 'CLIPBOARD 'TIMESTAMP))))) > (define-obsolete-function-alias 'x-select-text 'gui-select-text "25.1") > > (defcustom x-select-request-type nil Saving the text-timestamp pair instead of just text. > @@ -175,6 +186,7 @@ gui--selection-value-internal > ;; some other window systems. > (memq window-system '(x haiku)) > (eq type 'CLIPBOARD) > + ;; Should we unify this with the DWIM logic? > (gui-backend-selection-owner-p type)) > (let ((request-type (if (memq window-system '(x pgtk haiku)) > (or x-select-request-type I consider that check to be conceptually part of the same DWIM logic, and feel that maybe both checks should go together in the code. However I decided to preserve the code structure for now, since I wanted to make as little changes as possible, having the ownership check there can save unnecessary computations, and the check is mostly redundant now otherwise. > @@ -194,33 +206,34 @@ gui--selection-value-internal > (defun gui-selection-value () > (let ((clip-text > (when select-enable-clipboard > - (let ((text (gui--selection-value-internal 'CLIPBOARD))) > + (let ((text (gui--selection-value-internal 'CLIPBOARD)) > + (timestamp (gui-get-selection 'CLIPBOARD 'TIMESTAMP))) > (when (string= text "") > (setq text nil)) > - ;; When `select-enable-clipboard' is non-nil, > - ;; killing/copying text (with, say, `C-w') will push the > - ;; text to the clipboard (and store it in > - ;; `gui--last-selected-text-clipboard'). We check > - ;; whether the text on the clipboard is identical to this > - ;; text, and if so, we report that the clipboard is > - ;; empty. See (bug#27442) for further discussion about > - ;; this DWIM action, and possible ways to make this check > - ;; less fragile, if so desired. > + ;; Check the CLIPBOARD selection for 'newness', i.e., > + ;; whether it is different from the last time we did a > + ;; yank operation or whether it was set by Emacs itself > + ;; with a kill operation, since in both cases the text > + ;; will already be in the kill ring. See (bug#27442) and > + ;; (bug#53894) for further discussion about this DWIM > + ;; action, and possible ways to make this check less > + ;; fragile, if so desired. > (prog1 > - (unless (equal text gui--last-selected-text-clipboard) > + (unless (equal (list text timestamp) gui--last-clipboard-selection-fingerprint) > text) > - (setq gui--last-selected-text-clipboard text))))) > + (setq gui--last-clipboard-selection-fingerprint (list text timestamp)))))) > (primary-text > (when select-enable-primary > - (let ((text (gui--selection-value-internal 'PRIMARY))) > + (let ((text (gui--selection-value-internal 'PRIMARY)) > + (timestamp (gui-get-selection 'PRIMARY 'TIMESTAMP))) > (if (string= text "") (setq text nil)) > ;; Check the PRIMARY selection for 'newness', is it different > ;; from what we remembered them to be last time we did a > ;; cut/paste operation. > (prog1 > - (unless (equal text gui--last-selected-text-primary) > + (unless (equal (list text timestamp) gui--last-primary-selection-fingerprint) > text) > - (setq gui--last-selected-text-primary text)))))) > + (setq gui--last-primary-selection-fingerprint (list text timestamp))))))) > > ;; As we have done one selection, clear this now. > (setq next-selection-coding-system nil) - Using the timestamp-text pair instead of just text - Updated comments - I have tested the following cases: - Copy in another program -> C-y - Copy in other program -> C-y -> C-y -> M-y (the copied text is not duplicated in the kill ring, i.e., gui-selection-value returns nil for the second C-y) - C-k -> C-y -> M-y (the killed text is not duplicated in the kill ring, i.e., gui-selection-value returns nil) - Copy something in other program -> C-y -> M-y -> Copy the same thing in other program -> C-y (works as expected, i.e., the bug I reported is fixed) > @@ -239,7 +252,8 @@ gui-selection-value > ;; timestamps there is no way to know what the 'correct' value to > ;; return is. The nice thing to do would be to tell the user we > ;; saw multiple possible selections and ask the user which was the > - ;; one they wanted. > + ;; one they wanted. EDIT: We do have timestamps now, so we can > + ;; return the newer. > (or clip-text primary-text) > )) > An unrelated issue which could be solved with timestamps, but the comment must be old and says we don't have them. Just updated the comment saying we do have them now. > diff --git a/lisp/term/pc-win.el b/lisp/term/pc-win.el > index 327d51f275..2ae3cbd8b2 100644 > --- a/lisp/term/pc-win.el > +++ b/lisp/term/pc-win.el > @@ -248,7 +248,7 @@ w16-selection-owner-p > ;; Windows clipboard. > (cond > ((not text) t) > - ((equal text gui--last-selected-text-clipboard) text) > + ((equal text (car gui--last-clipbaord-selection-fingerprint)) t) > (t nil))))) > - Replaced the check - Returned t instead of text - Have not tested since I don't use Windows, but it's semantically equivalent as before.