From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: A few questions about desktop.el Date: Tue, 09 Aug 2005 11:31:22 +0200 Message-ID: <857jevwj6d.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> References: <42F7715F.1070508@soem.dk> <42F8576D.8070200@soem.dk> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1123580721 24024 80.91.229.2 (9 Aug 2005 09:45:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2005 09:45:21 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Lars Hansen , emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Aug 09 11:45:19 2005 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1E2QeK-0004dE-69 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 09 Aug 2005 11:43:56 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1E2QhM-0003lJ-Cq for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 09 Aug 2005 05:47:04 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1E2Qev-0003Bn-E6 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Aug 2005 05:44:33 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1E2Qes-0003A3-I6 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Aug 2005 05:44:30 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1E2Qer-000382-Mx for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Aug 2005 05:44:29 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1E2QnV-0004cj-Ig for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Aug 2005 05:53:26 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lola.goethe.zz) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1E2QXe-0006gh-MB; Tue, 09 Aug 2005 05:37:03 -0400 Original-Received: by lola.goethe.zz (Postfix, from userid 1002) id A709F1C4F902; Tue, 9 Aug 2005 11:31:22 +0200 (CEST) Original-To: Juanma Barranquero In-Reply-To: (Juanma Barranquero's message of "Tue, 9 Aug 2005 10:49:21 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:41758 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:41758 Juanma Barranquero writes: > On 8/9/05, Lars Hansen wrote: > >> I guess it does not have to be automatically buffer local. But I am >> not shure what the advantages/disadvantages of either choice are. > > Well, the reason `make-local-variable' and > `make-variable-buffer-local' both exists is, I think, that in some > circumstances the default value of the variable is gonna weight more > than local changes (i.e, the local changes are going to be few and far > between), and in other cases the variable is going to have frequent > buffer-local modifications. Using the latter style when the former > works is not "bad", but it's a bit wasteful. I tend to use make-variable-buffer-local when a variable is tracking some state of a buffer, such that it would always be an error if two buffers shared such a variable. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum