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: find-file-noselect needs save-match-data Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 23:42:12 +0200 Message-ID: <85zm2xhrd7.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> References: <18030.3441.204697.244518@rgrjr.dyndns.org> <87zm3515r4.fsf@jurta.org> <85k5u8x2gm.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <87r6og6czf.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <85bqfkx0i5.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <87odjjzaoz.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <85ps3xoui7.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <857iq3n2b3.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <85myyxkfl4.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1182203000 9816 80.91.229.12 (18 Jun 2007 21:43:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 21:43:20 +0000 (UTC) Cc: miles.bader@necel.com, schwab@suse.de, emacs-devel@gnu.org, juri@jurta.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, miles@gnu.org To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jun 18 23:43:16 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1I0P08-0001nE-5t for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 23:43:08 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I0P07-0002mW-QT for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 17:43:07 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1I0P04-0002mR-CG for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 17:43:04 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1I0P01-0002mF-UI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 17:43:03 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I0P01-0002mC-Ov for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 17:43:01 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-in-11.arcor-online.net ([151.189.21.51]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1I0Ozz-0002pt-9P; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 17:42:59 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-in-08-z2.arcor-online.net (mail-in-08-z2.arcor-online.net [151.189.8.20]) by mail-in-11.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 075F211DD5; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 23:42:57 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from mail-in-05.arcor-online.net (mail-in-05.arcor-online.net [151.189.21.45]) by mail-in-08-z2.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE8B82130BA; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 23:42:56 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from lola.goethe.zz (dslb-084-061-074-062.pools.arcor-ip.net [84.61.74.62]) by mail-in-05.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E8CB1CB72B; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 23:42:56 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: by lola.goethe.zz (Postfix, from userid 1002) id 729CF1D0340C; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 23:42:12 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: (Richard Stallman's message of "Mon\, 18 Jun 2007 17\:30\:29 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.1.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-kernel: Linux 2.4-2.6 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:73263 Archived-At: Richard Stallman writes: > What is the relevant date for a function that never has been > different? > > I thought you said it had been changed, and complained that the > change could cause a bug. I took your word for it. Oh please. You took your mistaken recollection of my word for it. I certainly _never_ claimed that it had been changed. I claimed that the current implementation is arguably wrong in addition to being unnecesssarily inefficient. > If `save-match-data' was never changed, then there was no point at > which a change could have broken anything, thus no issue. I already gave an explicit Elisp example where save-match-data around a passage not accessing the match data leads to different results from not using save-match-data. So save-match-data is _not_ a noop in the absence of match-string and similar, and I asked what the rationale was for that (since it actually is _expensive_ to use markers here). I still am waiting for any rationale better than "there must be some reason". -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum