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: Distinguish between regional undo and undo to the beginning in undo-equiv-table Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2021 17:28:33 -0500 Message-ID: References: <195AF8D0-1BFD-419D-88A1-69EA1FEED4D6@gmail.com> <60DCC8C7-CCA4-4113-88BE-B81A395C494D@gmail.com> <4890CDDF-E0DD-464B-9268-AD404015129D@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="21638"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: emacs-devel To: Yuan Fu Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Mar 03 23:29:37 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 1lHZzt-0005XR-JC for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 03 Mar 2021 23:29:37 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:54130 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lHZzs-00030E-LQ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 03 Mar 2021 17:29:36 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:52070) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lHZyy-0002Bs-DQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Mar 2021 17:28:40 -0500 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:22180) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lHZyv-0005Qh-TK for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Mar 2021 17:28:39 -0500 Original-Received: from pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 3DB5C100250; Wed, 3 Mar 2021 17:28:36 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 8CF09100019; Wed, 3 Mar 2021 17:28:34 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1614810514; bh=SGsYf1jx6XLSmaY629zz85A5DpP4hL5ayg5yd9U2Ggc=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=QnUoUQe6SloNc6oxFsoxYwvWDlYjEYO+I8T0/AtAgqgMm2iVSWucs0eJW4nT9iNu5 CdkTK1uNbvfswkJqMtWjHZNSo2/h+sEu6b2c7qFgfcNyoNKyQ5Px0c5N7Rng/OzQ+P xmnWBpYnJn7x6QnZnv//cmWEwZkY6xZ13GAGqrPS0DkjTx8cFew5mEOcibbplirlXu 0oNCnEqYQ0TkMC4oNl22sf+sURfow0ZwpqCMR9H7e05W1bbq9U69ZNJAegEgJ4Q5Jw BkjEa2xC53d+katZFmni83m6su/DoIc3lCIn+i3dJ/R2yhw/cNNJEsHv7VkfOF1x6d qgRJKdoIwQo4Q== Original-Received: from alfajor (unknown [216.154.43.249]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5E8E91201B9; Wed, 3 Mar 2021 17:28:34 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: (Yuan Fu's message of "Wed, 3 Mar 2021 16:59:52 -0500") 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 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:265922 Archived-At: > Yes, that was supposed to be the one. Just to be sure I ran the test with > the old version and it didn=E2=80=99t error. Oops! I fixed the test, now = it errors > on the old version and passes after applying my fix (in the first > patch). The test first runs undo in region, then breaks the undo chain (my > 2nd patch failed to do that), then runs undo in region again. Perfect. > I=E2=80=99m not sure how to write the comment for that test. Maybe I could > write =E2=80=9Ctest for commit xxx=E2=80=9D but there is no commit number= to refer to > right now. That would be fine. Or just use some description of what the test does like "check the case of interrupted+repeated undo-in-region". Or just nothing at all and let the code speak for itself ;-) > BTW, I can=E2=80=99t quite get what the comment at simple.el:2920 means: > > (puthash list > ;; Prevent identity mapping. This can happen if > ;; consecutive nils are erroneously in undo list. > (if (or undo-in-region (eq list pending-undo-list)) > t > pending-undo-list) > undo-equiv-table) > Is it that if there is (nil nil nil) on the top of buffer-undo-list, > the middle one will be considered an undo record and will be passed to > primitive-undo? I think so, yes. > In that case nothing is done and nothing is added to buffer-undo-list? Exactly. > Then should we add a mapping for the buffer-undo-list to t at that > point? Or should we just do nothing? Good question. I think you have a better understanding of how the equiv table should be filled than I do at this point, so I'd trust your judgment. Stefan