From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lars Ingebrigtsen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#31658: 25.2; Number of changes undone should be controlled by a variable Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2019 23:58:55 +0200 Message-ID: <878spt1syo.fsf@gnus.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="164476"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: 31658@debbugs.gnu.org To: Ruy Exel Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Oct 10 00:00:17 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@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 1iIK0F-000gcp-JQ for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 00:00:15 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:60382 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iIK0E-0002KU-55 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 09 Oct 2019 18:00:14 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:55499) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iIK04-0002J4-Nc for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Oct 2019 18:00:06 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iIK03-00034Y-4M for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Oct 2019 18:00:04 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:45502) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iIK03-00034U-1W for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Oct 2019 18:00:03 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iIK02-0003TB-Ua for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Oct 2019 18:00:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Lars Ingebrigtsen Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2019 22:00:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 31658 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 31658-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B31658.157065834613234 (code B ref 31658); Wed, 09 Oct 2019 22:00:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 31658) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Oct 2019 21:59:06 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54323 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iIJz7-0003RO-N4 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 09 Oct 2019 17:59:06 -0400 Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.231.51]:45222) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iIJz6-0003RE-2w for 31658@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 09 Oct 2019 17:59:04 -0400 Original-Received: from cm-84.212.202.86.getinternet.no ([84.212.202.86] helo=marnie) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iIJz2-00059P-Uq; Wed, 09 Oct 2019 23:59:03 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Ruy Exel's message of "Wed, 30 May 2018 14:59:35 -0300") X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 209.51.188.43 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:168808 Archived-At: Ruy Exel writes: > After I updated Emacs to the latest version I noticed that the behavior > of the undo command has changed in the sense that a single invocation of > undo effectively undoes many more recent changes than it used to and I > often find myself having to re-do the changes and reentering the whole > information again rather than taking advantage of the undo command. > > After a little fiddling I realized that this feature is controlled by > the function 'undo-auto-amalgamate' which contains the line > > (< last-amalgamating-count 20) > > apparently bundling up to 20 recent changes for the next invocation of > undo. > > My solution was simply to edit that function, replacing 20 by zero, and > the old behavior, which I am used to, was restored. > > The purpose of this bug-report/feature-request is to suggest that > instead of hard coding a fixed number, such as 20, the number of changes > bundled together should be determined by a variable which the user could > customize if desired. I think that sounds like a reasonable (and useful) request. Does anybody object to adding such a defcustom? -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no