From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: 27.0.50: How can I test a buffer-local window-configuration-change-hook in batch mode? Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2019 20:35:33 +0300 Message-ID: <83lft7tnoa.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83ftjixlwh.fsf@gnu.org> <72dda818-78b6-953f-ba5c-e2e1c81c036e@orcon.net.nz> <93cb893c-a77d-112e-e84c-e4f358686abd@gmx.at> <7c3b27d1-7be1-b1de-ae85-728d11f0e771@orcon.net.nz> <474b5ee0-d765-03fd-51df-789532a9fd32@gmx.at> <83tv7vvpqv.fsf@gnu.org> <46229722-5fd5-f1a3-c7d7-96f3f5e05ad8@orcon.net.nz> <83d0ejvj91.fsf@gnu.org> <837e4rvg9s.fsf@gnu.org> <83mudntqrj.fsf@gnu.org> Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="126639"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" Cc: psainty@orcon.net.nz, rudalics@gmx.at, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Oct 26 19:36:27 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iOPzH-000WjP-1A for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 26 Oct 2019 19:36:27 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:41106 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iOPzF-0001OB-RL for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 26 Oct 2019 13:36:25 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:37855) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iOPyk-0001H4-2s for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 26 Oct 2019 13:35:55 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:43882) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iOPyi-0005HR-Qp; Sat, 26 Oct 2019 13:35:52 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=3773 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1iOPye-0000Sh-I6; Sat, 26 Oct 2019 13:35:52 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from Stefan Monnier on Sat, 26 Oct 2019 13:14:22 -0400) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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:241474 Archived-At: > From: Stefan Monnier > Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2019 13:14:22 -0400 > Cc: psainty@orcon.net.nz, rudalics@gmx.at, emacs-devel@gnu.org > > - next-line is very rarely called as a function (C-h f suggests to > use forward-line instead in Lisp code), so it's virtually never > used in non-displayed buffers. > - posn-at-point doesn't return useful information AFAICT in > non-displayed buffers. > - for vertical-motion it's not as clear, but a quick grep suggests that > it's also rather unusual to call it in a non-displayed buffer. Since when are 3 random examples brought up by 5 sec of digging into a faulty memory enough to consider a good theory eating dust?