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: Lower-level change hook immune to with-silent-modifications Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2022 22:55:50 -0400 Message-ID: References: <2c2746e5f2558a87e8eab6f0914264a020173a9d.camel@pm.me> <27630AA3-8026-4E24-8852-ACCD9325B99D@gmail.com> <0E9E702B-B07C-4794-8498-29B9320E14CC@gmail.com> <871qvorqvv.fsf@localhost> <5D6F74DB-79C2-4D7E-B830-B529C3A5CD16@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="10764"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/29.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: Ihor Radchenko , Emacs Devel To: Yuan Fu Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Jun 17 04:56:57 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 1o22AK-0002Zp-Ok for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 17 Jun 2022 04:56:56 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:47784 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o22AJ-0000kF-B1 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 16 Jun 2022 22:56:55 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:45032) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o229M-0008Rv-QX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jun 2022 22:55:56 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:51463) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o229K-0003IG-Ls for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jun 2022 22:55:55 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 75578808A2; Thu, 16 Jun 2022 22:55:53 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 2585F8051A; Thu, 16 Jun 2022 22:55:52 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1655434552; bh=eaapS6jJW3NUf+V9ezt//EVv5pTo3K0xp3OENSQI26c=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=Hshb4nVj56qRGDOuWXeK7Q1eUnMxZi+v+zewUvlTHCbUw4UNq2swcMEXRgDBt8/H6 BY9RL6VbWJ6cYONCCmgUeJU89P9F9WzpeuFVYqfGf5eKNhHpIH5KLeNdf106aO/SNP c4+C8ZWlAh4IcSZ2AONWDkj1kOjOVNUfHt8DpbNJELAYzu5JOA8gGhovfpmUSsOlbE rm0HOBlYuaS1jpg3pCaU+dbHnn5YSwccM0QVy08xYTE3JVdcmaBcQPkh0KRzVH7gcW 5mRmgd1c2E5+SPc0YRcWCs+6X0wfC6E52F3Z3aKNpKHA44wsmDORJiXo3Gn5xs4UoI H+WaQderj5Yyg== Original-Received: from alfajor (unknown [45.72.221.51]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C9F6D1202AF; Thu, 16 Jun 2022 22:55:51 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <5D6F74DB-79C2-4D7E-B830-B529C3A5CD16@gmail.com> (Yuan Fu's message of "Thu, 16 Jun 2022 19:25:33 -0700") 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:291264 Archived-At: > I think you probably want a separate hook just for this purpose, rather t= han > repurposing ts_record_change. We could have a lower-level > after-change-functions that is immune to with-silent-modifications. Wheth= er > we should add such hook is probably another discussion. (So I opened a new > thread.) I think it will be handy, but I don=E2=80=99t know that problem = it > might cause. As I just argued in bug#51766, I don't think it makes sense to try to have such "a lower-level after-change-functions that is immune to with-silent-modifications". Stefan