* bug#16752: 24.3.50; pp-to-string deactivates mark
@ 2014-02-14 9:46 Helmut Eller
2014-02-14 10:11 ` Eli Zaretskii
2014-02-14 17:42 ` Stefan Monnier
0 siblings, 2 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Helmut Eller @ 2014-02-14 9:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 16752
Evaluating this expression returns:
(list deactivate-mark
(pp-to-string '1)
deactivate-mark)
returns (nil "1" t). Deactivating the mark is a surprising and
unnecessary side effect.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread* bug#16752: 24.3.50; pp-to-string deactivates mark
2014-02-14 9:46 bug#16752: 24.3.50; pp-to-string deactivates mark Helmut Eller
@ 2014-02-14 10:11 ` Eli Zaretskii
2014-02-14 11:02 ` Helmut Eller
2014-02-14 17:42 ` Stefan Monnier
1 sibling, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread
From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2014-02-14 10:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Helmut Eller; +Cc: 16752
> From: Helmut Eller <eller.helmut@gmail.com>
> Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 10:46:08 +0100
>
> Evaluating this expression returns:
>
> (list deactivate-mark
> (pp-to-string '1)
> deactivate-mark)
>
> returns (nil "1" t). Deactivating the mark is a surprising and
> unnecessary side effect.
_Any_ change to _any_ buffer will set deactivate-mark, which is a
global variable.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* bug#16752: 24.3.50; pp-to-string deactivates mark
2014-02-14 10:11 ` Eli Zaretskii
@ 2014-02-14 11:02 ` Helmut Eller
2014-02-14 11:16 ` Eli Zaretskii
0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread
From: Helmut Eller @ 2014-02-14 11:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Eli Zaretskii; +Cc: 16752
On Fri, Feb 14 2014, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> From: Helmut Eller <eller.helmut@gmail.com>
>> Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 10:46:08 +0100
>>
>> Evaluating this expression returns:
>>
>> (list deactivate-mark
>> (pp-to-string '1)
>> deactivate-mark)
>>
>> returns (nil "1" t). Deactivating the mark is a surprising and
>> unnecessary side effect.
>
> _Any_ change to _any_ buffer will set deactivate-mark, which is a
> global variable.
What has that do to with pp-to-string? I didn't ask for _any_ change to
_any_ buffer.
Helmut
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* bug#16752: 24.3.50; pp-to-string deactivates mark
2014-02-14 11:02 ` Helmut Eller
@ 2014-02-14 11:16 ` Eli Zaretskii
2014-02-14 11:22 ` Eli Zaretskii
2014-02-14 11:23 ` Helmut Eller
0 siblings, 2 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2014-02-14 11:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Helmut Eller; +Cc: 16752
> From: Helmut Eller <eller.helmut@gmail.com>
> Cc: 16752@debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 12:02:33 +0100
>
> >> (list deactivate-mark
> >> (pp-to-string '1)
> >> deactivate-mark)
> >>
> >> returns (nil "1" t). Deactivating the mark is a surprising and
> >> unnecessary side effect.
> >
> > _Any_ change to _any_ buffer will set deactivate-mark, which is a
> > global variable.
>
> What has that do to with pp-to-string? I didn't ask for _any_ change to
> _any_ buffer.
See pp-buffer, which is called by pp-string. You asked for pp-string,
which does its job using a temporary buffer.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* bug#16752: 24.3.50; pp-to-string deactivates mark
2014-02-14 11:16 ` Eli Zaretskii
@ 2014-02-14 11:22 ` Eli Zaretskii
2014-02-14 11:23 ` Helmut Eller
1 sibling, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2014-02-14 11:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: eller.helmut; +Cc: 16752
> Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 13:16:49 +0200
> From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
> Cc: 16752@debbugs.gnu.org
>
> See pp-buffer, which is called by pp-string. You asked for pp-string,
Sorry, I meant pp-to-string, of course.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* bug#16752: 24.3.50; pp-to-string deactivates mark
2014-02-14 11:16 ` Eli Zaretskii
2014-02-14 11:22 ` Eli Zaretskii
@ 2014-02-14 11:23 ` Helmut Eller
2014-02-14 11:39 ` Eli Zaretskii
1 sibling, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread
From: Helmut Eller @ 2014-02-14 11:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Eli Zaretskii; +Cc: 16752
On Fri, Feb 14 2014, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> From: Helmut Eller <eller.helmut@gmail.com>
>> Cc: 16752@debbugs.gnu.org
>> Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 12:02:33 +0100
>>
>> >> (list deactivate-mark
>> >> (pp-to-string '1)
>> >> deactivate-mark)
>> >>
>> >> returns (nil "1" t). Deactivating the mark is a surprising and
>> >> unnecessary side effect.
>> >
>> > _Any_ change to _any_ buffer will set deactivate-mark, which is a
>> > global variable.
>>
>> What has that do to with pp-to-string? I didn't ask for _any_ change to
>> _any_ buffer.
>
> See pp-buffer, which is called by pp-string. You asked for pp-string,
> which does its job using a temporary buffer.
So you're saying that it's not a bug that pp-to-string modifies
deactivate-mark?
Helmut
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* bug#16752: 24.3.50; pp-to-string deactivates mark
2014-02-14 11:23 ` Helmut Eller
@ 2014-02-14 11:39 ` Eli Zaretskii
0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2014-02-14 11:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Helmut Eller; +Cc: 16752
> From: Helmut Eller <eller.helmut@gmail.com>
> Cc: 16752@debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 12:23:02 +0100
>
> On Fri, Feb 14 2014, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>
> >> From: Helmut Eller <eller.helmut@gmail.com>
> >> Cc: 16752@debbugs.gnu.org
> >> Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 12:02:33 +0100
> >>
> >> >> (list deactivate-mark
> >> >> (pp-to-string '1)
> >> >> deactivate-mark)
> >> >>
> >> >> returns (nil "1" t). Deactivating the mark is a surprising and
> >> >> unnecessary side effect.
> >> >
> >> > _Any_ change to _any_ buffer will set deactivate-mark, which is a
> >> > global variable.
> >>
> >> What has that do to with pp-to-string? I didn't ask for _any_ change to
> >> _any_ buffer.
> >
> > See pp-buffer, which is called by pp-string. You asked for pp-string,
> > which does its job using a temporary buffer.
>
> So you're saying that it's not a bug that pp-to-string modifies
> deactivate-mark?
No, of course not. I just described how this happens and why. The
fix should be almost trivial, I think.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* bug#16752: 24.3.50; pp-to-string deactivates mark
2014-02-14 9:46 bug#16752: 24.3.50; pp-to-string deactivates mark Helmut Eller
2014-02-14 10:11 ` Eli Zaretskii
@ 2014-02-14 17:42 ` Stefan Monnier
2014-02-14 18:17 ` Eli Zaretskii
2016-09-18 23:55 ` Alex
1 sibling, 2 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Stefan Monnier @ 2014-02-14 17:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Helmut Eller; +Cc: 16752
forcemerge 16728 16752
thanks
> Evaluating this expression returns:
> (list deactivate-mark
> (pp-to-string '1)
> deactivate-mark)
deactivate-mark is a global variable and lots of functions happen to
work on internal buffers, which ends up "unwittingly" setting
deactivate-mark to t.
There are 2 directions to try and fix it:
1- let-bind deactivate-mark in functions like pp-to-string so as to
eliminate those spurious deactivations. But there can be many of
them, and it doesn't solve the problem where the buffer-modification
is done in a non-temporary buffer.
2- make deactivate-mark buffer-local. This is "The Right Way" but
might introduce new problems.
E.g. we really should deactivate the mark in all the buffers that
have their deactivate-mark set.
Stefan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread* bug#16752: 24.3.50; pp-to-string deactivates mark
2014-02-14 17:42 ` Stefan Monnier
@ 2014-02-14 18:17 ` Eli Zaretskii
2014-02-14 18:27 ` Helmut Eller
2014-02-14 21:00 ` Stefan Monnier
2016-09-18 23:55 ` Alex
1 sibling, 2 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2014-02-14 18:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefan Monnier; +Cc: 16752, eller.helmut
> From: Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>
> Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 12:42:25 -0500
> Cc: 16752@debbugs.gnu.org
>
> 1- let-bind deactivate-mark in functions like pp-to-string so as to
> eliminate those spurious deactivations. But there can be many of
> them, and it doesn't solve the problem where the buffer-modification
> is done in a non-temporary buffer.
> 2- make deactivate-mark buffer-local. This is "The Right Way" but
> might introduce new problems.
> E.g. we really should deactivate the mark in all the buffers that
> have their deactivate-mark set.
3- Save and restore deactivate-mark inside with-temp-buffer, which
will probably solve 99.99% of these unexpected side effects.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* bug#16752: 24.3.50; pp-to-string deactivates mark
2014-02-14 18:17 ` Eli Zaretskii
@ 2014-02-14 18:27 ` Helmut Eller
2014-02-14 18:38 ` Eli Zaretskii
2014-02-14 21:00 ` Stefan Monnier
1 sibling, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread
From: Helmut Eller @ 2014-02-14 18:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 16752
On Fri, Feb 14 2014, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> From: Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>
>> Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 12:42:25 -0500
>> Cc: 16752@debbugs.gnu.org
>>
>> 1- let-bind deactivate-mark in functions like pp-to-string so as to
>> eliminate those spurious deactivations. But there can be many of
>> them, and it doesn't solve the problem where the buffer-modification
>> is done in a non-temporary buffer.
>> 2- make deactivate-mark buffer-local. This is "The Right Way" but
>> might introduce new problems.
>> E.g. we really should deactivate the mark in all the buffers that
>> have their deactivate-mark set.
>
> 3- Save and restore deactivate-mark inside with-temp-buffer, which
> will probably solve 99.99% of these unexpected side effects.
4- Introduce something like buffer-disable-undo that disables this
automatic deactivate-mark updating. BTW, with-temp-buffer should
disable undo by default.
Helmut
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* bug#16752: 24.3.50; pp-to-string deactivates mark
2014-02-14 18:27 ` Helmut Eller
@ 2014-02-14 18:38 ` Eli Zaretskii
0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2014-02-14 18:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Helmut Eller; +Cc: 16752
> From: Helmut Eller <eller.helmut@gmail.com>
> Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 19:27:30 +0100
>
> On Fri, Feb 14 2014, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>
> >> From: Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>
> >> Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 12:42:25 -0500
> >> Cc: 16752@debbugs.gnu.org
> >>
> >> 1- let-bind deactivate-mark in functions like pp-to-string so as to
> >> eliminate those spurious deactivations. But there can be many of
> >> them, and it doesn't solve the problem where the buffer-modification
> >> is done in a non-temporary buffer.
> >> 2- make deactivate-mark buffer-local. This is "The Right Way" but
> >> might introduce new problems.
> >> E.g. we really should deactivate the mark in all the buffers that
> >> have their deactivate-mark set.
> >
> > 3- Save and restore deactivate-mark inside with-temp-buffer, which
> > will probably solve 99.99% of these unexpected side effects.
>
> 4- Introduce something like buffer-disable-undo that disables this
> automatic deactivate-mark updating.
I thought about such a possibility as well, but it sounds less
attractive, because it places the burden on users and Lisp programs.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* bug#16752: 24.3.50; pp-to-string deactivates mark
2014-02-14 18:17 ` Eli Zaretskii
2014-02-14 18:27 ` Helmut Eller
@ 2014-02-14 21:00 ` Stefan Monnier
2014-02-15 7:14 ` Eli Zaretskii
1 sibling, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread
From: Stefan Monnier @ 2014-02-14 21:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Eli Zaretskii; +Cc: 16752, eller.helmut
> 3- Save and restore deactivate-mark inside with-temp-buffer, which
> will probably solve 99.99% of these unexpected side effects.
While with-temp-buffer is not technically a function, I'd count it as
covered by point number 1 ;-)
Stefan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread* bug#16752: 24.3.50; pp-to-string deactivates mark
2014-02-14 21:00 ` Stefan Monnier
@ 2014-02-15 7:14 ` Eli Zaretskii
2014-02-17 3:11 ` Stefan Monnier
0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread
From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2014-02-15 7:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefan Monnier; +Cc: 16752, eller.helmut
> From: Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>
> Cc: eller.helmut@gmail.com, 16752@debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 16:00:34 -0500
>
> > 3- Save and restore deactivate-mark inside with-temp-buffer, which
> > will probably solve 99.99% of these unexpected side effects.
>
> While with-temp-buffer is not technically a function, I'd count it as
> covered by point number 1 ;-)
My suggestion would free implementors of pp-to-string etc. from doing
that in every place where they use temporary buffers, which is a very
frequent paradigm in Emacs.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* bug#16752: 24.3.50; pp-to-string deactivates mark
2014-02-15 7:14 ` Eli Zaretskii
@ 2014-02-17 3:11 ` Stefan Monnier
2014-02-17 5:31 ` Eli Zaretskii
0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread
From: Stefan Monnier @ 2014-02-17 3:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Eli Zaretskii; +Cc: 16752, eller.helmut
> My suggestion would free implementors of pp-to-string etc. from doing
> that in every place where they use temporary buffers, which is a very
> frequent paradigm in Emacs.
But it'll break code like
(let ((buf (current-buffer)))
(with-temp-buffer
...
(with-current-buffer buf
(insert "toto"))
...))
-- Stefan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread* bug#16752: 24.3.50; pp-to-string deactivates mark
2014-02-17 3:11 ` Stefan Monnier
@ 2014-02-17 5:31 ` Eli Zaretskii
2014-02-17 20:27 ` Stefan Monnier
0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread
From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2014-02-17 5:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefan Monnier; +Cc: 16752, eller.helmut
> From: Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>
> Cc: eller.helmut@gmail.com, 16752@debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2014 22:11:33 -0500
>
> > My suggestion would free implementors of pp-to-string etc. from doing
> > that in every place where they use temporary buffers, which is a very
> > frequent paradigm in Emacs.
>
> But it'll break code like
>
> (let ((buf (current-buffer)))
> (with-temp-buffer
> ...
> (with-current-buffer buf
> (insert "toto"))
> ...))
And that is a problem because..?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* bug#16752: 24.3.50; pp-to-string deactivates mark
2014-02-17 5:31 ` Eli Zaretskii
@ 2014-02-17 20:27 ` Stefan Monnier
2014-02-17 20:46 ` Eli Zaretskii
2014-02-18 8:31 ` Helmut Eller
0 siblings, 2 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Stefan Monnier @ 2014-02-17 20:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Eli Zaretskii; +Cc: 16752, eller.helmut
>> > My suggestion would free implementors of pp-to-string etc. from doing
>> > that in every place where they use temporary buffers, which is a very
>> > frequent paradigm in Emacs.
>> But it'll break code like
>>
>> (let ((buf (current-buffer)))
>> (with-temp-buffer
>> ...
>> (with-current-buffer buf
>> (insert "toto"))
>> ...))
> And that is a problem because..?
Because it breaks some code.
After thinking some more about it, I wonder, tho: why don't we just make
deactivate-mark buffer-local?
Stef
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread* bug#16752: 24.3.50; pp-to-string deactivates mark
2014-02-17 20:27 ` Stefan Monnier
@ 2014-02-17 20:46 ` Eli Zaretskii
2014-02-18 0:05 ` Stefan Monnier
2014-02-18 8:31 ` Helmut Eller
1 sibling, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread
From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2014-02-17 20:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefan Monnier; +Cc: 16752, eller.helmut
> From: Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>
> Cc: eller.helmut@gmail.com, 16752@debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 15:27:49 -0500
>
> After thinking some more about it, I wonder, tho: why don't we just make
> deactivate-mark buffer-local?
During a feature freeze? Who knows what this will break?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* bug#16752: 24.3.50; pp-to-string deactivates mark
2014-02-17 20:27 ` Stefan Monnier
2014-02-17 20:46 ` Eli Zaretskii
@ 2014-02-18 8:31 ` Helmut Eller
2014-02-18 15:18 ` Eli Zaretskii
1 sibling, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread
From: Helmut Eller @ 2014-02-18 8:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefan Monnier; +Cc: 16752
On Mon, Feb 17 2014, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> After thinking some more about it, I wonder, tho: why don't we just make
> deactivate-mark buffer-local?
After adding (make-variable-buffer-local 'deactivate-mark) to my .emacs
I didn't see any problems.
I noticed that mark is no longer deactivated by C-x C-e or M-C-x in the
*scratch* buffer. Presumably because prin1 now only modifies the
deactivate-mark variable in the *Messages* buffer.
I also discovered that add-text-properties doesn't deactivate mark. That
was surprising to me because usually changing text properties counts as
modifying the buffer and supposedly "all the primitives that change the
buffer set `deactivate-mark'".
Helmut
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* bug#16752: 24.3.50; pp-to-string deactivates mark
2014-02-18 8:31 ` Helmut Eller
@ 2014-02-18 15:18 ` Eli Zaretskii
2014-02-18 15:33 ` Helmut Eller
0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread
From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2014-02-18 15:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Helmut Eller; +Cc: 16752
> From: Helmut Eller <eller.helmut@gmail.com>
> Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>, 16752@debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 09:31:14 +0100
>
> I also discovered that add-text-properties doesn't deactivate mark.
It does for me, so please show a recipe.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* bug#16752: 24.3.50; pp-to-string deactivates mark
2014-02-18 15:18 ` Eli Zaretskii
@ 2014-02-18 15:33 ` Helmut Eller
2014-02-18 16:52 ` Eli Zaretskii
0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread
From: Helmut Eller @ 2014-02-18 15:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Eli Zaretskii; +Cc: 16752
On Tue, Feb 18 2014, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> From: Helmut Eller <eller.helmut@gmail.com>
>> Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>, 16752@debbugs.gnu.org
>> Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 09:31:14 +0100
>>
>> I also discovered that add-text-properties doesn't deactivate mark.
>
> It does for me, so please show a recipe.
Hmm.. can't reproduce it now. Apparently had called
add-text-properties two times with the same arguments.
Helmut
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* bug#16752: 24.3.50; pp-to-string deactivates mark
2014-02-18 15:33 ` Helmut Eller
@ 2014-02-18 16:52 ` Eli Zaretskii
0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2014-02-18 16:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Helmut Eller; +Cc: 16752
> From: Helmut Eller <eller.helmut@gmail.com>
> Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, 16752@debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 16:33:21 +0100
>
> On Tue, Feb 18 2014, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>
> >> From: Helmut Eller <eller.helmut@gmail.com>
> >> Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>, 16752@debbugs.gnu.org
> >> Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 09:31:14 +0100
> >>
> >> I also discovered that add-text-properties doesn't deactivate mark.
> >
> > It does for me, so please show a recipe.
>
> Hmm.. can't reproduce it now. Apparently had called
> add-text-properties two times with the same arguments.
Then I think that's expected, since the second time is not considered
a change of the buffer (Emacs simply optimizes such a no-op away,
including the deactivation of mark).
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* bug#16752: 24.3.50; pp-to-string deactivates mark
2014-02-14 17:42 ` Stefan Monnier
2014-02-14 18:17 ` Eli Zaretskii
@ 2016-09-18 23:55 ` Alex
1 sibling, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Alex @ 2016-09-18 23:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefan Monnier; +Cc: 16728, 16752, Helmut Eller
close 16728 25.1
quit
Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:
> forcemerge 16728 16752
> thanks
>
>> Evaluating this expression returns:
>> (list deactivate-mark
>> (pp-to-string '1)
>> deactivate-mark)
>
> deactivate-mark is a global variable and lots of functions happen to
> work on internal buffers, which ends up "unwittingly" setting
> deactivate-mark to t.
>
> There are 2 directions to try and fix it:
> 1- let-bind deactivate-mark in functions like pp-to-string so as to
> eliminate those spurious deactivations. But there can be many of
> them, and it doesn't solve the problem where the buffer-modification
> is done in a non-temporary buffer.
> 2- make deactivate-mark buffer-local. This is "The Right Way" but
> might introduce new problems.
> E.g. we really should deactivate the mark in all the buffers that
> have their deactivate-mark set.
>
>
> Stefan
Looks like option 2 was chosen, and the test cases in both bugs now work
as expected, so I believe this is done. Please re-open if I'm wrong.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2016-09-18 23:55 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2014-02-14 9:46 bug#16752: 24.3.50; pp-to-string deactivates mark Helmut Eller
2014-02-14 10:11 ` Eli Zaretskii
2014-02-14 11:02 ` Helmut Eller
2014-02-14 11:16 ` Eli Zaretskii
2014-02-14 11:22 ` Eli Zaretskii
2014-02-14 11:23 ` Helmut Eller
2014-02-14 11:39 ` Eli Zaretskii
2014-02-14 17:42 ` Stefan Monnier
2014-02-14 18:17 ` Eli Zaretskii
2014-02-14 18:27 ` Helmut Eller
2014-02-14 18:38 ` Eli Zaretskii
2014-02-14 21:00 ` Stefan Monnier
2014-02-15 7:14 ` Eli Zaretskii
2014-02-17 3:11 ` Stefan Monnier
2014-02-17 5:31 ` Eli Zaretskii
2014-02-17 20:27 ` Stefan Monnier
2014-02-17 20:46 ` Eli Zaretskii
2014-02-18 0:05 ` Stefan Monnier
2014-02-18 8:31 ` Helmut Eller
2014-02-18 15:18 ` Eli Zaretskii
2014-02-18 15:33 ` Helmut Eller
2014-02-18 16:52 ` Eli Zaretskii
2016-09-18 23:55 ` Alex
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).