From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: martin rudalics Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#46908: 28.0.50; Dozens of spurious markers in buffer-undo-list Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2021 09:10:15 +0100 Message-ID: <7d95925c-f512-185d-bffd-be493408f415@gmx.at> References: <87o8fzn9fa.fsf@web.de> <0ca78c1b-7737-8a87-9edc-deaa551677fa@gmx.at> <87wnumswhr.fsf@web.de> <6ccba248-7643-280a-4560-88872fb08457@gmx.at> <87sg5asr6k.fsf@web.de> <7b04f87b-8d7a-e151-5b4a-d77bd6ea1506@gmx.at> <87y2f1m7ez.fsf@web.de> <87mtve2t2q.fsf@web.de> <5e12eae1-94fd-d2c7-923d-f4dbabf3da52@gmx.at> <87k0qh9j6p.fsf@web.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="26743"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: 46908@debbugs.gnu.org, Yuan Fu To: Michael Heerdegen Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Mar 09 09:11:24 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@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 1lJXSe-0006rZ-9L for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 09 Mar 2021 09:11:24 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:41130 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lJXSd-0001cA-9b for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 09 Mar 2021 03:11:23 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:42602) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lJXSL-0001aY-Ss for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Mar 2021 03:11:05 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:33998) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lJXSI-0007uO-It for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Mar 2021 03:11:05 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lJXSI-0000hR-Ei for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Mar 2021 03:11:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: martin rudalics Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2021 08:11:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 46908 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 46908-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B46908.16152774242631 (code B ref 46908); Tue, 09 Mar 2021 08:11:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 46908) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Mar 2021 08:10:24 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:45543 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lJXRg-0000gH-Ed for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 09 Mar 2021 03:10:24 -0500 Original-Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.22]:54747) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lJXRe-0000g4-PJ for 46908@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 09 Mar 2021 03:10:23 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1615277416; bh=KDLW3URIHv2zxjbPnXmM3rHPrQb1RPu+y/oVOPw4CfI=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=jIBDayP8ogVeZIBiX4zqPM7b7KO7LLec7t046QEC0Ytg4VgeD1p9yHw2+ZS6fT1pK jpbfmpefbCoWI+Q65kwivwI/dioppUQFHH9RH8R62QbmO0Fvynh/nwL/ojLo5Zvzao mfM2pt3cGvFnRCU9v8KKrObLu44ltFCYYfH9jnYs= X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c Original-Received: from [192.168.1.100] ([212.95.5.105]) by mail.gmx.net (mrgmx105 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MRmjq-1lCPsQ06Ly-00THC6; Tue, 09 Mar 2021 09:10:16 +0100 In-Reply-To: <87k0qh9j6p.fsf@web.de> Content-Language: en-US X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:kNl9aZzTmq+dPdHvvyPqop1Ql9ypBdqzPUfa/K48mqKXdkR5HBF aLlo0Ggb2hh0vVFi1hRI8d7GLROE6Tv0a6WHLtbFS2AAjCV02fknG1/vefih9NQOqMoo929 cO/KGxcBdzBiS08T8+hF/UHIbO5oDAAHHDUgVUPhWzc76QELYsuplLaoTM8B5Qo3xkx0Wmj A2VGUeyHc+OwCSLjqot8w== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:wAN+AmaVOcQ=:sFn/cWeOKAH3rOClT03pZ0 0nr3PA7PspzP5o0tDNREpufuW/kov8OoLSrwPTxguSf/7K7Wb4r/3DP3O3XVLLomxQ/3nbOVM OqYf/DgMy6qsHGLIPK5RXON1B/kARyytfYCq7wZq2OTV6y9M4Xn7mScIfeciFrHyB06at0pd5 Uc2q4WcvJPgVuKySD0KIUYRppT+eRHVoxkNOOvdzgnIsT6Izw0yKriWUN4UVlFpyNdFvXjUdN F91NnH2Hoj+itXpC0YmHr+mtq0m9ECrnn7CnS+hlFg0gHMKFE1WT6P25rpHnU10SFhIArEhS6 j6ZXg9NVs3lBQSJEYqXuXw/P0KrWllUAZaxYB83dbOjpFgvTcP1Mrsn0mL9fXHXVDd/M4yL+k 3Arrp4DSZRH4fqcuvKwFJWcyCShVwFkTNSkhewmCzNzgYJgx+P+fTZkFxLbgGZ9C4/KkMo7F5 eO+4ca0UntUchFTQCP18EHNhpBctZEuV//mMH6PPj5YcZAjiEmmiuLag2OcMrYAS0e0fuphHP s5d0NdzHdChQKgyIEK8/HZXMpZZNa21DY+icjmFPlJQ2I/KJqw5GhPD/YfDqXfXq7Wf09MmcS 9gQG5t6ldgMGUGzgpuouayFJbley3gvpAt0KRfLETFGsu/QXGueUO4ZgZOxkj41rCdxwrlwtg n2lL6YCYHH/q8TxGygTQE4bc0uv3nwhgjviDZNcTnrMGzcJ9wArl+jXxxLCFNtn5eI58tZib3 KLkwgxBlTLd0mLGmXYpxRJ4+dBoTNCKEU4vdlAtHr4+jxJbqa/giv1BMhxBRh8cSc6VQImOG X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:201900 Archived-At: > `add-to-history' has no relevance here, no. There mere existence of a > marker in any buffer does, IIUC, cause it to be referenced by > buffer-undo-list sooner or later, because undoing and redoing inside > text containing a marker is not always without ambiguity regarding > marker positioning, so the undo system adds hints to buffer-undo-list > how these markers must be placed/repositioned. Suppose I put a marker into a buffer and do ten distinct modifications of the buffer, each modifying that marker's position. So I get ten additional entries in the undo list. Does this mean I get ten copies of that marker too? martin