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 12:26:34 +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> <87sg6cruy1.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="27869"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: 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 13:28:36 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 1l7dkS-0007BX-2x for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 04 Feb 2021 13:28:36 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:49680 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l7dkR-0000rQ-4W for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 04 Feb 2021 07:28:35 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:57012) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l7diY-00086Y-KR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 04 Feb 2021 07:26:38 -0500 Original-Received: from heytings.org ([95.142.160.155]:36314) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l7diX-0000C9-7L for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 04 Feb 2021 07:26:38 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=heytings.org; s=20210101; t=1612441594; bh=GS4u0YilOzGrROW7HUstBQEXZOVS+yN6eFp56APn6Js=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:References:From; b=XMCr+X6FHIAeUcBDg6d3iGCkwU2CicSXubUm9q+OI1t+ZePqMtPVOGqDme7YU1/sd GoOpHwZxkoG9yZola1ySHCmqxCP5g5k4LR0qQbx/y4aiaNxtLPsuRrW85LJ+gfxfLI yXwkZTEgILz94O7WSAYn4cCXwsoHrEtsj0dKtufc0bK67PDQKefoHxYfIU5mQjfN6e py64WKXcS7+ITNMPOVH/mtZvFXn2XWuOjVnoH1r7u5VgszvZEYnAoxUtiXBlVaEr/9 yDnap4XEcXHdWg5SE1/dOMPSmwDM3zlSJVghS8nvJYUbF84nIi6GauigaVjtBqaWw7 /COVsz9VbR66g== In-Reply-To: <87sg6cruy1.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:263870 Archived-At: >> 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. > > Ideally, we could ask "this action will take MB; really do it?", > and we won't need any new variable. > > But like I said, I don't know how feasible this is to ask before the > doing the action. > In fact that option already exists (almost): undo-ask-before-discard. It would make sense to set its default value to t instead of nil. I said "almost" because it asks after executing the command, not before. But at least it asks...