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 11:43:21 -0400 Message-ID: References: <165191796540.22789.3432288633082546349@vcs2.savannah.gnu.org> <20220507100605.B7CA7C051FF@vcs2.savannah.gnu.org> <87fsli7uhf.fsf@gnus.org> <87bkw67rru.fsf@gnus.org> <8735hi7r7k.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="15044"; 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 17:44:20 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 1no5Ya-0003iF-1l for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 09 May 2022 17:44:20 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:45272 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1no5YZ-0005in-50 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 09 May 2022 11:44:19 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:44230) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1no5Y0-000529-SY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 09 May 2022 11:43:44 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:45726) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1no5Xy-0000R1-6o for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 09 May 2022 11:43:43 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 15A0D4408E1; Mon, 9 May 2022 11:43:40 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id C2C7A4408A0; Mon, 9 May 2022 11:43:38 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1652111018; bh=1sDpwlXjxnWs/Pk+rasBEV9k+TdiiqQ5p8PkU9BaQtw=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=oNj0eYln/vJ+43+3HdbvRHHwJom+Zk3lk82CgOBJElD0OzMtfMO9PGgkE2g2zYuP9 qOPMlucBSQv1rmEPZ/2BgUPJ/aAW5YrCtypxQuISnTm/MoFmAXy2EzCgRbNM+eObvO 9MooUNcxo6B9mv5PZVgKgTtvoMH0FTp6S182b1mFQq5/u2GjFzf80gYUN1iGKKq+5v Fdx7eTdFfpyGbnebn/aHPxXFOpFkSvbKO70bplwx5y3nCKhKDXXhNlzer4NLnwbWgB xid6pDXXpVEYUmcKSwHpQPzfF92Q8p+3rGQ6/VOWVpBTy9nUmayw2OWICEh5CZtpiw /78X9O26rH8ww== Original-Received: from alfajor (lechon.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.27.242]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A1A781204D4; Mon, 9 May 2022 11:43:38 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <8735hi7r7k.fsf@gnus.org> (Lars Ingebrigtsen's message of "Mon, 09 May 2022 15:47:43 +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:289535 Archived-At: Lars Ingebrigtsen [2022-05-09 15:47:43] wrote: > Lars Ingebrigtsen writes: >> Well... would upping auto_save_modified to MODIFF in >> with-silent-modifications do the trick instead? (I mean, if >> recent-auto-save-p was already true when the macro was entered.) I.e., >> reverse which modiff we're twiddling here. > I.e., have a special value for FLAG that says "update > BUF_AUTOSAVE_MODIFF to MODIFF" in restore-buffer-modified-p. Maybe we could make `buffer-modified-p` return `autosaved` rather than `t` when the buffer is modified but auto-saved, and then have `restore-buffer-modified-p` accept such a value accordingly, yes. Stefan