From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: The *Warnings* buffer and undo Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 17:23:00 -0400 Message-ID: References: <460583AD.7010002@gmail.com> <85abxxw46j.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <87y7lf1z6t.fsf@catnip.gol.com> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1175290028 8866 80.91.229.12 (30 Mar 2007 21:27:08 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 21:27:08 +0000 (UTC) Cc: rgm@gnu.org, lennart.borgman@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Miles Bader Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Mar 30 23:27:07 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HXOcg-0003Ii-Bq for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 30 Mar 2007 23:27:02 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HXOfP-0002b2-JA for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 30 Mar 2007 16:29:51 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HXOdg-0000TT-GO for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 30 Mar 2007 17:28:04 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HXOdf-0000SG-Va for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 30 Mar 2007 17:28:04 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HXOdf-0000Rk-Oz for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 30 Mar 2007 16:28:03 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1HXOav-0006x8-3t for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 30 Mar 2007 17:25:13 -0400 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1HXOYm-0000lD-H8; Fri, 30 Mar 2007 17:23:00 -0400 In-reply-to: <87y7lf1z6t.fsf@catnip.gol.com> (message from Miles Bader on Fri, 30 Mar 2007 07:07:22 +0900) X-detected-kernel: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:68778 Archived-At: (3) Modify the emacs insert/delete primitives to do the job, e.g., they could look for a variable like `inhibit-undo', and if non-nil, fixup buffer-undo-list to account for the new operation instead of actually recording the new operation in it. This seems like a good feature to perhaps add. However, it occurs to me that the insertion of text (such as, new warnings) uses rather little space in an undo list. So I wonder how it happened that the undo list in the warnings buffer got big enough to trigger the warning. Did that really happen?