From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Gregory Heytings Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Concern about new binding. Date: Thu, 04 Feb 2021 10:20:32 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20210202134950.vybbpf3iewbymfjo.ref@Ergus> <20210202134950.vybbpf3iewbymfjo@Ergus> <87h7mt3qjo.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> <87im78usd9.fsf@gnus.org> <878s84url8.fsf@gnus.org> <878s84ta7n.fsf@gnus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=us-ascii Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="4165"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Richard Stallman , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Lars Ingebrigtsen Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Feb 04 11:36:12 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1l7bzg-0000yH-9m for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 04 Feb 2021 11:36:12 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50414 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l7bzf-00029J-59 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 04 Feb 2021 05:36:11 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:58356) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l7bkd-00033K-Qx for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 04 Feb 2021 05:20:39 -0500 Original-Received: from heytings.org ([95.142.160.155]:36174) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l7bka-0001Kx-7X; Thu, 04 Feb 2021 05:20:39 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=heytings.org; s=20210101; t=1612434033; bh=LzBWBQMuciK3g/S1pPzB8OZX7Evdtuy2M8yFEr2OYZg=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:References:From; b=G4pwpseQMd5xNFkuK7hnZOJu2qamYUNX4iBj+/29PPIMPzNeXZx9G1pmwAgh2vCq9 6zpgBI49mqstKyrRPteW5Z88UPvCqX34ptVEUVCLWvK1W3mmuR3OHcsKm/1hML8ExL Mc/XEGWiO7c3HAhG17eyncURr2b4qXlnOIw7QpbqV6kJOEMwdv8mLSr8q6i4JPmTLf BI0jVMP3hOEr5j2I4nhywQYCn+J/3xjore9+O0HDvS/lUgDiffQvAswuXStytmrc4v cFwwcArJWhzQj38TATLUf3YeImKmCC8pPlsNLUMfymfTOYaY5CeCtY+i2gGq73mSXa YVu24OrOzxbJA== In-Reply-To: <878s84ta7n.fsf@gnus.org> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=95.142.160.155; envelope-from=gregory@heytings.org; helo=heytings.org X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:263864 Archived-At: >>> Or... if it could offer to to keep the undo info, even if it's over >>> the current general limit, that would be even nicer, perhaps? >> >> I don't have strong feelings about this. Perhaps offering to keep the >> undo info after the command has been executed would be nicer indeed. >> But not executing the command before a confirmation is perhaps less >> risky. > > I was thinking about asking before doing anything, if that's practically > possible, but I haven't looked at the code. > I misunderstood what you said indeed. I think asking before doing anything would be okay, but I guess in that case it would be necessary to introduce an "undo-outer-outer-limit" at, say, 250 MB, above which it would not be possible to keep the undo info.