From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dmitry Gutov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#55491: All completion fragments get added to obarray Date: Sat, 11 Jun 2022 03:46:10 +0300 Message-ID: References: <8AB5676F-ABCB-4849-AD65-B302AC5BDE6F@gmail.com> <87sfp7hpgg.fsf@gnus.org> <87ee0p83zo.fsf@gnus.org> <63f442fd-0fb3-3a33-9d05-ec8091ed8c04@yandex.ru> <87k09v2o35.fsf@gnus.org> <9ccf94ab-8dba-e274-fbb9-fc5d0e28cfa1@yandex.ru> <87czfmx8ps.fsf@gnus.org> <110782b2-e3b0-70e4-7991-e8e71b9ff4c2@yandex.ru> <878rq8om65.fsf@gnus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="23433"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.9.1 Cc: 55491@debbugs.gnu.org, Richard Stallman , jdtsmith@gmail.com To: Lars Ingebrigtsen Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Jun 11 02:47:24 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1nzpHg-0005tU-NT for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 11 Jun 2022 02:47:24 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50602 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nzpHf-0000aK-Bj for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 10 Jun 2022 20:47:23 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:38450) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nzpHK-0000YZ-Qr for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jun 2022 20:47:02 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:57654) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nzpHK-0000aI-Iz for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jun 2022 20:47:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1nzpHK-0008KL-Ga for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jun 2022 20:47:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Dmitry Gutov Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 11 Jun 2022 00:47:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 55491 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 55491-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B55491.165490838431960 (code B ref 55491); Sat, 11 Jun 2022 00:47:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 55491) by debbugs.gnu.org; 11 Jun 2022 00:46:24 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:51551 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1nzpGh-0008JQ-Tl for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jun 2022 20:46:24 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-ej1-f51.google.com ([209.85.218.51]:36369) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1nzpGd-0008J8-4p for 55491@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jun 2022 20:46:22 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-ej1-f51.google.com with SMTP id s12so994283ejx.3 for <55491@debbugs.gnu.org>; Fri, 10 Jun 2022 17:46:19 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=sender:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject :content-language:to:cc:references:from:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=eOMAgMZ2VJghkEfX05H4bB/WWRYDAsH0S9I/N5ZMYVQ=; b=QOPktP7zk37bvReYrwkCV+2UGkNlG28RseM3WlAM4uQ/rIP1cgjP6Rgo/ZxEZF7PQm OUQjd5C2yF4r2emeHy58NQ3JNyrEt64WbXHKKd0apj31sG7eNNNtzM2pQy2kuopRcB/D KAUxiBPo1oHsPfnfMLxlsRsABkYw6kBNJioJ6+Bimke+TGcVR+nlhPeW5C0K7iqQbzDZ YbcPaeXiXNcaKqiXcM4OvpdGF1PfHqDmOdoHNzH/uFhY23FyrdKTbgCwix2dI1SHCKK5 7ufZo5yAmvRag+mjFG0K56S938LxxLMdhhR/gQfVTK51Y663we691Z/aGWQnuxk+BAQr VACQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent :subject:content-language:to:cc:references:from:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=eOMAgMZ2VJghkEfX05H4bB/WWRYDAsH0S9I/N5ZMYVQ=; b=F+E9E3a2Y90ydAjK4RQ1NwAVgVo8r9EfZ+G1EkW6wrmoETLpXm8hCQbFEt80j3gnzY l9TeUVEpShk5+ORlk9vooQChjnB77ogjB7B11wrjMLYdpTDn/4p+7qbnfnhCswxS4Zco MOf6o1DuOnz06mAP9O9OgyXr6XDgzORSYz3fM0g5999aOPRJIf63xc4zcnbTFsVQSno9 a+WtSQU4LJW+TvXla+G7/YrP6XQzT+KLPb62wgVrs6kkg0S1+dxjYVv7xJ+ZNqwnVCPA PJyXZAVVWaG18bzkAV0NPhSJyLJrrWLNOwUC4x9H+AdQTJWWEug02r2Fce35rRAQHdBq X+bQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533mSfoUvyM4gJXCbkhPcKMvTwtZgx8EmfbN2bB4x0XNSvpnBunS 4b9bpkHC/54sqNdU8T15t0I= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJydYKpFjzyzSaCOSHdWjdcXhXQ9ZEpUK0qYC6dRrRgVY477KT3Is073r0+azm1/Cv7K4rlkgw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:2d29:b0:70e:8b1c:c3f0 with SMTP id gs41-20020a1709072d2900b0070e8b1cc3f0mr36086287ejc.37.1654908373046; Fri, 10 Jun 2022 17:46:13 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from [192.168.236.48] ([173.237.64.48]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id v7-20020a1709062f0700b006fea2705d18sm261371eji.210.2022.06.10.17.46.11 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 10 Jun 2022 17:46:12 -0700 (PDT) Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: <878rq8om65.fsf@gnus.org> X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:234244 Archived-At: On 07.06.2022 12:30, Lars Ingebrigtsen wrote: > Dmitry Gutov writes: > >> How about this, then? > [...] > >> - (read (current-buffer)))))) >> + (let ((pt (point))) >> + (ignore-errors >> + (forward-sexp) >> + (intern-soft >> + (buffer-substring pt (point))))))))) >> (error nil)))) > Makes sense, I think. (But the ignore-errors is probably not > necessary, since the entire form is already covered by one in form of > the condition-case...) Thanks. I've pushed the updated change. Seems to work okay.