From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: master e8488bcc9c: Avoid having font locking triggering unnecessary auto-saving Date: Mon, 09 May 2022 09:22:26 -0400 Message-ID: References: <165191796540.22789.3432288633082546349@vcs2.savannah.gnu.org> <20220507100605.B7CA7C051FF@vcs2.savannah.gnu.org> <87fsli7uhf.fsf@gnus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="19547"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/29.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Lars Ingebrigtsen Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon May 09 15:43:13 2022 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 1no3fM-0004rw-W2 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 09 May 2022 15:43:13 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:57898 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1no3fL-0001ru-SJ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 09 May 2022 09:43:11 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:47632) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1no3LN-00057d-MX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 09 May 2022 09:22:33 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:40042) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1no3LK-000888-Q3 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 09 May 2022 09:22:32 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id CE4D0440637; Mon, 9 May 2022 09:22:28 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 899D244041F; Mon, 9 May 2022 09:22:27 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1652102547; bh=xMxcmc4oBdH17FTiP2Bo2iPIlB3mc0j/OhIJgeUTrhU=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=fxFl8VdadNRdPLgQS6UuS2EXDJqmoORRBxDwLm2pNXFHLvRl3sq79PiXvMzbJawN+ 2KquYUF7s0ULkElfMPSPAb5y29Bt5IU2o+XqKKLxODKGwooCnY3aLMQrYl4acnvE10 Imfo9hGzmrky5eaTRiI1il/m14rO1sm6tBDorHzybURp52CCen41S2CNtDWINRvtwU ryqj5C28nziYboBNorYYO+4ek7Uy7AC+jBg1wIocp6ZZ2T/+UEczIkJV4ewQM3SxOT rEBGVhlp89Zg965xVEEOol/eWBeeBwfcbfsdJRGks+HflRffLYXxP0aHkN41O5DJsW Pui7M66KA79ow== Original-Received: from pastel (unknown [45.72.221.51]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 442111202EE; Mon, 9 May 2022 09:22:27 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <87fsli7uhf.fsf@gnus.org> (Lars Ingebrigtsen's message of "Mon, 09 May 2022 14:37:00 +0200") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-Spam_score_int: -42 X-Spam_score: -4.3 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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:289530 Archived-At: Lars Ingebrigtsen [2022-05-09 14:37:00] wrote: > Hm, this had one unintended consequence, apparently -- in a mode I have > that inserts image thumbnails (using with-silent-modifications when > slapping a 'display property over some text), the buffer wasn't updated > afterwards... So perhaps this needs a rethink, or (at least) > documentation. I'm not completely surprised, to be honest. The handling of MODIFFs is surprisingly delicate. Take a look at the code for `Frestore_buffer_modified_p` to get an idea. Setting MODIFF back to a previous value is something I would not recommend. Stefan