all messages for Emacs-related lists mirrored at yhetil.org
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: /* FIXME: Call signal_after_change!  */ in callproc.c.  Well, why not?
Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2019 21:47:52 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191221214751.GB8692@ACM> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <83k16pzgzu.fsf@gnu.org>

Hello, Eli.

Sorry my last post was not thought through.  I hope this one is better.

On Sat, Dec 21, 2019 at 20:11:01 +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2019 17:23:24 +0000
> > From: Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de>
> > 
> >  	      /* FIXME: Call signal_after_change!  */
> > +              beg = PT;

> Can you tell why you needed this variable and the assignment?  AFAIK,
> PT doesn't change when we call decode_coding_c_string.

I'd misunderstood decode_coding_c_string.  You're right, PT doesn't
change with this macro.  With this, the arguments I was getting to
after-change-functions were wrong.

However, I've kept BEG for the next version of the patch.

> >  	      decode_coding_c_string (&process_coding,
> >  				      (unsigned char *) buf, nread, curbuf);
> >  	      unbind_to (count1, Qnil);
> > +              signal_after_change (beg, 0, PT - beg);
> >  	      if (display_on_the_fly
> >  		  && CODING_REQUIRE_DETECTION (&saved_coding)
> >  		  && ! CODING_REQUIRE_DETECTION (&process_coding))
> > 
> > 
> > , and this appears to solve the OP's problem.
> > 
> > However, a few lines further on, there's a del_range_2 call inside a condition
> > I don't understand (though might, with a great deal of study).  I suspect that
> > the call to signal_after_change ought to take this del_range_2 into account,
> > possibly coming after it.
> > 
> > Would somebody who's familiar with this bit of callproc.c please help me out
> > here, and explain what this call to del_range_2 is doing, and whether there's
> > anything basically wrong with my simple-minded addition of
> > signal_after_change.

> I'm not sure what you want to hear.  The del_range_2 call deletes the
> just-inserted text, because the condition means that text was inserted
> using the wrong coding-system to decode the incoming bytes.  What does
> that mean for the modification hooks, I don't know: the
> before-change-functions were already called, but nothing was inserted
> from the Lisp application's POV, so if you insist on having before and
> after hooks to be called in pairs, you are in a conundrum.

I think I've solved this with the new variable prepared_position.  It
records the position of BEG for prepare_to_modify_buffer, and only calls
that function if it hasn't already done so for that BEG.  It's not an
elegant solution, but I think it will work.

> It's possible that we should simplify all this by calling the before
> hooks just once before the loop and the after hooks just once after
> the loop, instead of calling them for each individual chunk inside the
> loop, but again I don't know what that means for applications which
> expects these hook calls to pair.

I don't think this is necessary.  (If we positively want to do it,
that's a different matter.)

Here's the latest version of my patch.  It's only been slightly tested,
but it doesn't produce any unexpected "successes" from 'make check'.



diff --git a/src/callproc.c b/src/callproc.c
index b51594c2d5..34da7af863 100644
--- a/src/callproc.c
+++ b/src/callproc.c
@@ -746,6 +746,8 @@ call_process (ptrdiff_t nargs, Lisp_Object *args, int filefd,
       int carryover = 0;
       bool display_on_the_fly = display_p;
       struct coding_system saved_coding = process_coding;
+      ptrdiff_t prepared_position = 0;
+      ptrdiff_t beg;
 
       while (1)
 	{
@@ -780,7 +782,13 @@ call_process (ptrdiff_t nargs, Lisp_Object *args, int filefd,
 	    ;
 	  else if (NILP (BVAR (current_buffer, enable_multibyte_characters))
 		   && ! CODING_MAY_REQUIRE_DECODING (&process_coding))
-	    insert_1_both (buf, nread, nread, 0, 1, 0);
+            {
+              beg = PT;
+              insert_1_both (buf, nread, nread, 0, prepared_position < PT, 0);
+              if (prepared_position < PT)
+                prepared_position = PT;
+              signal_after_change (beg, 0, PT - beg);
+            }
 	  else
 	    {			/* We have to decode the input.  */
 	      Lisp_Object curbuf;
@@ -788,7 +796,11 @@ call_process (ptrdiff_t nargs, Lisp_Object *args, int filefd,
 
 	      XSETBUFFER (curbuf, current_buffer);
 	      /* FIXME: Call signal_after_change!  */
-	      prepare_to_modify_buffer (PT, PT, NULL);
+              if (prepared_position < PT)
+                {
+                  prepare_to_modify_buffer (PT, PT, NULL);
+                  prepared_position = PT;
+                }
 	      /* We cannot allow after-change-functions be run
 		 during decoding, because that might modify the
 		 buffer, while we rely on process_coding.produced to
@@ -822,6 +834,7 @@ call_process (ptrdiff_t nargs, Lisp_Object *args, int filefd,
 		  continue;
 		}
 
+              signal_after_change (PT, 0, process_coding.produced_char);
 	      TEMP_SET_PT_BOTH (PT + process_coding.produced_char,
 				PT_BYTE + process_coding.produced);
 	      carryover = process_coding.carryover_bytes;


-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).



  reply	other threads:[~2019-12-21 21:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-12-21 17:23 /* FIXME: Call signal_after_change! */ in callproc.c. Well, why not? Alan Mackenzie
2019-12-21 18:11 ` Eli Zaretskii
2019-12-21 21:47   ` Alan Mackenzie [this message]
2019-12-22 18:38     ` Eli Zaretskii
2019-12-24  9:47       ` Alan Mackenzie
2019-12-24 12:51         ` Alan Mackenzie
2019-12-24 15:58           ` Eli Zaretskii
2019-12-24 15:47         ` Eli Zaretskii
2019-12-29 13:34           ` Alan Mackenzie
2019-12-29 16:23             ` Stefan Monnier
2020-01-03  8:45             ` Eli Zaretskii
2020-01-04 22:47               ` Alan Mackenzie
2020-01-05 18:17                 ` Eli Zaretskii
2020-01-05 18:48                   ` Alan Mackenzie
2020-01-21 20:34                     ` Alan Mackenzie
2020-01-22  3:27                       ` Eli Zaretskii
2020-01-22 20:05                         ` Alan Mackenzie

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20191221214751.GB8692@ACM \
    --to=acm@muc.de \
    --cc=eliz@gnu.org \
    --cc=emacs-devel@gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this external index

	https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
	https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs/org-mode.git

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.