From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Michael Heerdegen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#46908: 28.0.50; Dozens of spurious markers in buffer-undo-list Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2021 03:20:30 +0100 Message-ID: <87czw99ifl.fsf@web.de> References: <87o8fzn9fa.fsf@web.de> <0ca78c1b-7737-8a87-9edc-deaa551677fa@gmx.at> <87wnumswhr.fsf@web.de> <6ccba248-7643-280a-4560-88872fb08457@gmx.at> <87sg5asr6k.fsf@web.de> <7b04f87b-8d7a-e151-5b4a-d77bd6ea1506@gmx.at> <87y2f1m7ez.fsf@web.de> <87mtve2t2q.fsf@web.de> <5e12eae1-94fd-d2c7-923d-f4dbabf3da52@gmx.at> <87k0qh9j6p.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="30764"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: 46908@debbugs.gnu.org, Yuan Fu To: martin rudalics Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Mar 09 03:21:28 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-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 1lJS00-0007u3-2I for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 09 Mar 2021 03:21:28 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56968 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lJRzy-0005oX-Fd for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 08 Mar 2021 21:21:26 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:42114) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lJRza-0005oQ-H6 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Mar 2021 21:21:02 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:33709) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lJRza-0007HD-4W for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Mar 2021 21:21:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lJRzZ-0004Eu-Vo for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Mar 2021 21:21:01 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Michael Heerdegen Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2021 02:21:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 46908 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 46908-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B46908.161525644016246 (code B ref 46908); Tue, 09 Mar 2021 02:21:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 46908) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Mar 2021 02:20:40 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:45255 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lJRzE-0004Dy-9O for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 08 Mar 2021 21:20:40 -0500 Original-Received: from mout.web.de ([217.72.192.78]:40479) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lJRzC-0004Dk-Ee for 46908@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 08 Mar 2021 21:20:38 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=web.de; s=dbaedf251592; t=1615256431; bh=/itHvTo4OxJ8jX8Ob5+6faKK7oMWR1k/jDbAH2jCLbg=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To; b=IgZY1KY14DhCZYVYPU8Q24n8ku/eQ7nF1/71/mpx19smUbEi4QZNqUMDG4+gYUSA/ +UDM7s7kDYWQRsLvegRn87WvZxgr4XHb4ImbQJjEOZxtZi1xU3QfSiG5Xk2Ole4uyq BZO5jxwIHlXR47IMQvM0tIvWPGCgYPaImhe4untg= X-UI-Sender-Class: c548c8c5-30a9-4db5-a2e7-cb6cb037b8f9 Original-Received: from drachen.dragon ([94.218.220.60]) by smtp.web.de (mrweb105 [213.165.67.124]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MLARU-1l1ELN1q1y-00IUvk; Tue, 09 Mar 2021 03:20:31 +0100 In-Reply-To: <87k0qh9j6p.fsf@web.de> (Michael Heerdegen's message of "Tue, 09 Mar 2021 03:04:14 +0100") X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:nc9si6LKhnEO/oihWvxOfcJTVSdp/bxYfFNsvkX6U9wwWVr12w3 k8lyFtwBRDe00LolqP2pBwVauRdbYyWl8TupU2qR7nA0seg3YxLEOouHvhXL9Hj01BfEXeO xz7n6TxFsH7X9l7bj6WdyxT3i/EZHwN9aRooy/krRWukFgbYqXYVk4owKWyhOdVYMY40lIY /sQY1ewcxm5qWmoMB7MiQ== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:4Yo/Y7S99Yw=:SQ+5ul6PMvF6JBxu1YnB9E 0/z+BNlqd2gshFgpdZhaxi8d8SFUtXWE5flmtQeCvbtQ2h0xYbq2AUxBautoXf1+H2lLmTVew y0g8B3BQirDG8anQaih/vdMsMLJQ1hN3/44oVZ1T2ziDEqdUtUbpvv4Q1JSKucfEU8vaiCI7Y iHBbPQ6TsCd+DySun69zEMUxqpmfbVQzH7TgjVR2z3kb9GmhHFbUhSFOVH0rMgrQ/QGP2dmk3 EqbqA3E+cM3Zn/Lj6iearnHn+OjBysM/fwgeAVEJ46mGPbFNqXz+I0PzNQ9KkKn9V6NuXRRra Zey67v0XaKO1zUzfmepnokaxFG9fM2VSKhC7s7ToKaS+QzTus/38lnBpyaSOef1HnZ1SaV66c jJnJZfCn3+R7kwBAWO+ZEjBYkSwG/K7HKse0JViqVMDnK4iaT0U6o9CtiHjBiOjxaKmGmvsqS f6nCk/ONL6jDSJ+DMsvFQv3km8943YqOCc2LK/lhMIb1AK1rS/Js12J3jX7ClVSOetYmX8hPR 03SXX9/nOFcEYj9+A7/suRfcueVJ3ZBrhllzwj3nOUTih91jA6/D/t7Fxdv5a/kQ+Vv2GTN2t zAji819KMqfuAQFy+gc1ypho8/BCsvUdOr+XmB9QVUkzk6oOQU6b28Q3sxef9MO/ZpqyRzDTc fRBASqAdCyrhPvPCkuYOWiv48S8aRJDH7tSdVU+lzGJPAj5Vexg0LStDHWJSB28Jqgs0hnTPU qSrS6ZW0ECNmhV7JDXZQc11KstkEbAgO14bY1y0H4KpAWLEprJhmWFWDg1Y9GGHWM5C9lkug X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:201893 Archived-At: Michael Heerdegen writes: > > But how comes that `add-to-history' affects `buffer-undo-list'? > > `add-to-history' has no relevance here, no. There mere existence of a > marker in any buffer does, IIUC, cause it to be referenced by > buffer-undo-list sooner or later, because undoing and redoing inside > text containing a marker is not always without ambiguity regarding > marker positioning, so the undo system adds hints to buffer-undo-list > how these markers must be placed/repositioned. I did some more experimentation (repeated copy, paste, undo and garbage-collect in *scratch*), and I saw that the number of markers living in buffer-undo-list is not monotonously increasing. After some time, the amount settles between 20 and 45 or so. And stays in that range. Giving that a large, but still limited number of copies of the mark marker is stored in the mark rings, that amount of markers isn't a surprise, and if the number is not constantly growing, everything...works as expected so far I think. Correct? Michael.