Re: Uninformative comment in files.el

[Yoni Rabkin Katzenell <yoni-r@actcom.com>]

Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:

>> After reading that thread (which I neglected to do beforehand, sorry) I
>> still think that revert-buffer should remove all overlays and the mark.
>
> I disagree.  Anything that's not a minor mode will suffer from similar
> problems and setting revert-buffer-function is not an option for them.
> Your change will cause problems for the other category of minor-mode
> like packages: those that need their overlays to survive a revert-buffer.

Maybe what confuses me is that it is called `revert-buffer' and not
something like `revert-to-file-contents'. I'd expect the former to
revert the buffer to a pristine state, but the latter to only change the
contents as they relate to the associated file.

I'll recapitulate what I wrote in a separate response: I'll wait until
it is clear what you guys want to do with `revert-buffer' (if anything),
then I'll see if I can help implement that. Currently I'm both unclear
as to the purpose of the function, and obviously ignorant of the
subtleties.

-- 
   "Cut your own wood and it will warm you twice"