From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: Question about memory usage Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2018 09:55:48 +0300 Message-ID: <83bmez4g0b.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83sh8c6byb.fsf@gnu.org> <690641bc-fc49-922a-26bd-6f92322d0cc0@zoho.com> <83po3g40c3.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1522824848 24712 195.159.176.226 (4 Apr 2018 06:54:08 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 06:54:08 +0000 (UTC) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Apr 04 08:54:04 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@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 1f3cJ2-0006JX-2x for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2018 08:54:04 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38150 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f3cL7-0001k8-6O for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2018 02:56:13 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:59077) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f3cKd-0001jo-Qd for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2018 02:55:44 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f3cKY-0007aA-UC for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2018 02:55:43 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:33798) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f3cKY-0007Zt-Q7 for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2018 02:55:38 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=3630 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1f3cKY-0004Ib-70 for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2018 02:55:38 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from =?utf-8?Q?Micha=C5=82?= Kondraciuk on Tue, 3 Apr 2018 21:16:41 +0200) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "help-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:116333 Archived-At: > From: Michał Kondraciuk > Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2018 21:16:41 +0200 > > > To disable undo, you should bind buffer-undo-list to t, not to nil. > > And with-temp-buffer already does that, because temporary buffers have > > their undo disabled by default. > > I know that, I meant it's common to see code like this in some packages, > especially when the buffer is actually displayed. > > > Did you try not setting buffer-undo-list at all? What did you see > > then? > > Emacs behaves as expected, i.e. memory usage is ~20MB all the time. OK, so what is your question now? Are you asking, like Stefan, why setting buffer-undo-list to nil in this case makes a difference, or are you asking a more general question (and if the latter, what are you asking)?