From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: New undo element (fun . args) Date: Mon, 07 Feb 2005 12:51:03 +0100 Message-ID: References: <87fz0jyn19.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org> <87mzunvyki.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1107777919 20309 80.91.229.2 (7 Feb 2005 12:05:19 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2005 12:05:19 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Feb 07 13:05:19 2005 Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Cy7dT-0001KW-H6 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 13:04:59 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Cy7ra-0007jI-Kv for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 07:19:34 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Cy7no-0006UD-M5 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 07:15:41 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Cy7nj-0006Sb-09 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 07:15:36 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Cy7nh-0006Cp-PO for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 07:15:33 -0500 Original-Received: from [212.88.64.25] (helo=mail-relay.sonofon.dk) by monty-python.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.34) id 1Cy7Py-0002ht-Oc for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Feb 2005 06:51:03 -0500 Original-Received: (qmail 88820 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2005 11:51:01 -0000 Original-Received: from unknown (HELO kfs-l.imdomain.dk.cua.dk) (213.83.150.2) by 0 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2005 11:51:01 -0000 Original-To: rms@gnu.org In-Reply-To: (Kim F. Storm's message of "Fri, 04 Feb 2005 16:40:57 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/21.3.50 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org X-MailScanner-To: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:32997 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:32997 storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) writes: >> In what way does the undo process fail to work? Where is the bug? > > I'm not sure it is a bug in the undo machinery or the way I try to use > it in cua, or a combination... I have installed change to cua to use the new undo apply element. The problems reported earlier were just errors in my code. It turned out to be quite tricky to get the usage right as an apply function need to install a proper _redo_ entry which may not really do anything but re-install the original _undo_ entry etc. I also changed primitive-undo to install at most one dummy apply element. -- Kim F. Storm http://www.cua.dk