From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#13949: 24.3.50; `fill-paragraph' should not always put the buffer as modified Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2013 19:46:41 +0200 Message-ID: <83ehfhj2m6.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83li9qir3i.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1363283276 32024 80.91.229.3 (14 Mar 2013 17:47:56 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2013 17:47:56 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 13949@debbugs.gnu.org To: Dani Moncayo Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Mar 14 18:48:21 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1UGCGL-0001OM-H6 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 14 Mar 2013 18:48:21 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:43762 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UGCFz-0000XD-2u for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 14 Mar 2013 13:47:59 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:51909) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UGCFv-0000X6-7M for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 14 Mar 2013 13:47:57 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UGCFq-0001Dy-Bd for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 14 Mar 2013 13:47:55 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:50378) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UGCFq-0001Du-85 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 14 Mar 2013 13:47:50 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UGCH0-0001NP-44 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 14 Mar 2013 13:49:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2013 17:49:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 13949 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 13949-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B13949.13632832855217 (code B ref 13949); Thu, 14 Mar 2013 17:49:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 13949) by debbugs.gnu.org; 14 Mar 2013 17:48:05 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54486 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UGCG4-0001M5-H6 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 14 Mar 2013 13:48:04 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout23.012.net.il ([80.179.55.175]:41278) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UGCG2-0001Lc-Hy for 13949@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 14 Mar 2013 13:48:03 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout23.012.net.il by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0MJN00H00W0JLZ00@a-mtaout23.012.net.il> for 13949@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 14 Mar 2013 19:46:44 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0MJN00HKQW1RG490@a-mtaout23.012.net.il>; Thu, 14 Mar 2013 19:46:40 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:72489 Archived-At: > Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2013 08:57:35 +0100 > From: Dani Moncayo > Cc: 13949@debbugs.gnu.org > > In general, I think that a command should flag the buffer as modified > only when the buffer contents at the end of the command were different > from the contents at the beginning of that same command. Then your wish is much broader than the original bug report says. E.g., you'd like the following to leave the buffer marked as unmodified, right? emacs -Q M-< C-d ; Or how about this: emacs -Q M-x overwrite-mode RET M-< ; fill-paragraph first removes all the newlines from the paragraph, and then inserts only as many as needed to get a filled paragraph. So the buffer gets changed at least twice in the process. > But, I don't know complex is that to implement, and perhaps that > complexity outweighs the benefits. Stefan answered that. I'll write there why I think it might not be a good idea.