From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Marcin Borkowski Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: A strange issue with buffer-undo-list Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2021 22:42:21 +0100 Message-ID: <87blbtiapu.fsf@mbork.pl> References: <87o8gbqs28.fsf@mbork.pl> <8735xm2t3p.fsf@web.de> <87r1l4n2w8.fsf@mbork.pl> <875z2f8xai.fsf@web.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="19344"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: mu4e 1.1.0; emacs 28.0.50 Cc: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org To: Michael Heerdegen Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Mar 08 22:43:42 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lJNfC-0004t8-5e for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 08 Mar 2021 22:43:42 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:33850 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lJNfB-0000aM-3Q for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 08 Mar 2021 16:43:41 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:50622) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lJNeN-0000a1-I6 for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Mar 2021 16:42:51 -0500 Original-Received: from mail.mojserwer.eu ([195.110.48.8]:58754) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lJNeJ-0007Oz-PU for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Mar 2021 16:42:51 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.mojserwer.eu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C9F1E6D7B; Mon, 8 Mar 2021 22:42:38 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail.mojserwer.eu Original-Received: from mail.mojserwer.eu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.mojserwer.eu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5IbuNpzG_WuB; Mon, 8 Mar 2021 22:42:25 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from localhost (178235147030.dynamic-3-poz-k-0-1-0.vectranet.pl [178.235.147.30]) by mail.mojserwer.eu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5D6DAE62F2; Mon, 8 Mar 2021 22:42:24 +0100 (CET) In-reply-to: <875z2f8xai.fsf@web.de> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=195.110.48.8; envelope-from=mbork@mbork.pl; helo=mail.mojserwer.eu X-Spam_score_int: -25 X-Spam_score: -2.6 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.6 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "help-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.help:128364 Archived-At: On 2021-02-26, at 01:53, Michael Heerdegen wrote: > Marcin Borkowski writes: > >> Still, these "change groups" seem a strange feature to me - they are >> hardly ever used in Emacs itself, right? > > Seems so. Where they are used - e.g. in the implementation of > `transpose-subr', they are important however. You wouldn't want that > undoing a transposition would happen in multiple steps uncovering > implementation details. Agreed, although I don't think undo would kick in within one command (without explicit undo boundaries). > Could be in other places they would also be appropriate but were > forgotten. May also be that automatic undo amalgamation conceals cases > were change group applications are missing. As above - isn't it rather that unless you put explicit undo boundaries, they are only inserted when the command loop takes over? > > BTW, in master your code example now works without errors, the problem > has been fixed (by Stefan). And your code also works as you intend. I > have tried. It doesn't work as intended however when using > `undo-tree-mode' (another minor bug I would say). Thanks for the answer, and sorry for the delay. Yes, I noticed it's fixed; I don't use undo-tree. Best, -- Marcin Borkowski http://mbork.pl