From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: raman@google.com Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: with-temp-buffer: should we set buffer-undo-list to t? Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 15:52:24 -0800 Message-ID: <22724.36280.852934.614634@gargle.gargle.HOWL> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1489276360 12266 195.159.176.226 (11 Mar 2017 23:52:40 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 23:52:40 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Mar 12 00:52:33 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cmqoK-0002Fv-2E for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 12 Mar 2017 00:52:32 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:45053 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cmqoQ-0006Eb-4V for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 11 Mar 2017 18:52:38 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:36736) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cmqoK-0006EW-3Z for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Mar 2017 18:52:33 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cmqoH-0007ja-2y for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Mar 2017 18:52:32 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-pf0-x232.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400e:c00::232]:33954) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cmqoG-0007jM-Sn for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Mar 2017 18:52:29 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-pf0-x232.google.com with SMTP id v190so55170434pfb.1 for ; Sat, 11 Mar 2017 15:52:28 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=from:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:date:to :subject; bh=kYX2lsoN5KdP+qAz9aN5wr0+49DL12O3tEb5dcyQmV4=; b=WJx0afW4ZF/CzdqEuim1aR/HkR6UUo1FkHAnkkYjeCfgQQ0GqqCVnOYnOdnudwUAPf iUB7bo/NbexONBgg/RCAUJ80e6Tn8BTQUolbk0G3evB05xSctDReweD9XN69cx8efxqQ NfGkysu2zcMmAeEW3ObN9BK9u60dt464EbJ3t8OIlFXA867rcGKEQSTr8C/SjM3KrbJL HWQaQjLbXPdGpySDw5dR0TOzY8sE8fyoW+TmoFuFZ6MRUmnknxXOi49xl18E7g070b1v 45V1CJoZGsNl4PTibwBmz/Rbl5M9iIYavnqXAzVTF4XlN7Z3HjbjP99U5e5zT0iTumRE w6SA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding :message-id:date:to:subject; bh=kYX2lsoN5KdP+qAz9aN5wr0+49DL12O3tEb5dcyQmV4=; b=JnIPtcU8LnguYnMXj5pzVbGR9L+yRfwtygHY8mHLIxOonQXawp/C19WPREmm7Czx3U ry33LZp5RXFlwx56yL1JQerbH9ey9WhGU+DvUdOREjrOO5mK8gTlqX2ifJgo3d+BODmF AaElT0Nj3JSf6y4t02khAP8FiVFBWuv73zVwZr0mK2kzQ0OKJgd6wWan5a4OB2U/cM8f Je+KOayufq9FSb5UTwSex9euKi4TnbYbvhEzSt1Y4M9CtoAWcdXAFMme9yd8pLk/rkFa NneRlx/9NbwljFpEdiYXvmWkalbm3eLNnrudEikUxFy7U8c4QQ7BUyPOu0iWekdje1qe DwTg== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39kmNq9he2M8CIGMX3lwMzcBtxREPvAC6JobtXk5FLMef9F/iqh1ODZs/sDU82SkKBd0 X-Received: by 10.98.213.130 with SMTP id d124mr29162834pfg.172.1489276347783; Sat, 11 Mar 2017 15:52:27 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from raman-glaptop2 (c-73-170-121-60.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [73.170.121.60]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e63sm25953215pfg.40.2017.03.11.15.52.26 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 11 Mar 2017 15:52:26 -0800 (PST) X-Mailer: VM 8.1.1 under 25.2.1 (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2607:f8b0:400e:c00::232 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:212931 Archived-At: Would setting buffer-undo-list to t in the macro definition of with-temp-buffer help save some work? At present we dont do this, and as a consequence, operations within body of with-tem-buffer may well push entries on the undo stack that just get thrown away. -- --