From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Daniel Colascione Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Unbalanced change hooks (part 2) [Documentation fix still remaining] Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2016 19:27:37 -0700 Message-ID: <0d2fb634-e268-d5cc-330c-931c6b2cd76e@dancol.org> References: <831t1wharr.fsf@gnu.org> <20160810161821.GB3413@acm.fritz.box> <83wpjofttf.fsf@gnu.org> <20160810185735.GD3413@acm.fritz.box> <20160811112951.GA2154@acm.fritz.box> <7e1478b6-cf00-fcbf-8c24-43bdaa57e2b6@dancol.org> <415d1cca-f32c-624e-a4be-9aadcf8a0f17@dancol.org> <83inujbpek.fsf@gnu.org> <83eg57bl8f.fsf@gnu.org> <5ee6ff4a-2d58-82f1-8e83-479c62f0b729@dancol.org> <837fazbjb4.fsf@gnu.org> <75100b15-d49f-5a1a-d73b-24db77c891bf@dancol.org> <831t17bged.fsf@gnu.org> <83y43fa1az.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1472524136 32213 195.159.176.226 (30 Aug 2016 02:28:56 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2016 02:28:56 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0 Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Aug 30 04:28:52 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1beYnD-0007xS-FO for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 30 Aug 2016 04:28:51 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:46583 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1beYnA-00041n-Vk for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 29 Aug 2016 22:28:49 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:60503) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1beYmA-0003yi-6Q for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Aug 2016 22:27:47 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1beYm7-0006Ue-1F for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Aug 2016 22:27:46 -0400 Original-Received: from dancol.org ([2600:3c01::f03c:91ff:fedf:adf3]:43542) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1beYm6-0006UV-OY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Aug 2016 22:27:42 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=dancol.org; s=x; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From:Cc:References:To:Subject; bh=ePPbf55rmawDejUpvFKeOYS+rpDt6/XQwGMPhHu4+f0=; b=dpOiZDiqfXi+vzD8AhhFPXR9GlIM6205Fdw0dTHz/NjuImlM+mT89YNTGKuCWpFUsvAXK4Utfv+Ag9S4gkGriddOZ0+CBMH8xfhGNfgjjdexU0up4PUX57puG0ztXP6gLylJLQbyBnt1GtMgQnmPg0WgGbDqMYfLZgezU6pR91cFxOBQnaxqsox7aYkcPi5d1X0cXg4ZwAVPrDhlHlQUOrTQsZliNsO3Jc9P2R7yWc1n4+JwPj5bn6AG2SEaG57uUtikgJ4D4I1jVGxuKPErUzAC9j/ndW/oMgCRewFlWrTJX1pw1j1egUm7aEICK3iLdJz138Bj7qFbasSTbEyoGw==; Original-Received: from c-73-97-199-232.hsd1.wa.comcast.net ([73.97.199.232] helo=[192.168.1.173]) by dancol.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1beYm5-0001KO-2z; Mon, 29 Aug 2016 19:27:41 -0700 In-Reply-To: <83y43fa1az.fsf@gnu.org> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 2600:3c01::f03c:91ff:fedf:adf3 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:206912 Archived-At: On 08/29/2016 11:16 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2016 21:04:42 +0300 >> From: Eli Zaretskii >> Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org >> >> That single case of #1 is revert-buffer > > Btw: not every call to revert-buffer hits this case. Quite the > contrary: almost none of them do. IOW, the situation where the > before-change hook is not called at all is very rare even if you only > consider the uses of revert-buffer. I think we fundamentally disagree about how rarity affects bug important: You: "This bug is rare. Cool. We don't have to worry about it much." Me: "This bug is rare. That's awful. That means that people won't hit this bug until it causes some horrible, non-reproducible problem."