From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Noam Postavsky Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#1501: Emacs 22 loses undo buffer Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2019 21:19:32 -0400 Message-ID: <87ef1engij.fsf@gmail.com> References: <85k1b7k763.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="150041"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.2.90 (gnu/linux) Cc: Emerick Rogul , 1501@debbugs.gnu.org, Chong Yidong To: Stefan Kangas Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Aug 22 03:20:16 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 1i0blw-000cw4-MH for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 22 Aug 2019 03:20:16 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:37496 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1i0blv-0006fc-Jh for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 21 Aug 2019 21:20:15 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:60750) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1i0bli-0006Tw-Pj for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 21 Aug 2019 21:20:03 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1i0blh-0003Bk-T1 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 21 Aug 2019 21:20:02 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:56295) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1i0blh-0003Bg-Q7 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 21 Aug 2019 21:20:01 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1i0blh-00080l-Jd for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 21 Aug 2019 21:20:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Noam Postavsky Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 01:20:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 1501 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 1501-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B1501.156643678330764 (code B ref 1501); Thu, 22 Aug 2019 01:20:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 1501) by debbugs.gnu.org; 22 Aug 2019 01:19:43 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36883 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1i0blO-000808-Lf for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 21 Aug 2019 21:19:42 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-io1-f47.google.com ([209.85.166.47]:41108) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1i0blM-0007zs-7v for 1501@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 21 Aug 2019 21:19:41 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-io1-f47.google.com with SMTP id j5so8534538ioj.8 for <1501@debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 21 Aug 2019 18:19:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version; bh=dLEtHrmV/EMeSZFsMGSaecd004xqoxaUXD7S3GeP2dA=; b=tDFR+CPhC2ilVVsq7cAcphh9bGE7lqzxZukbUZiElThogRi0p5qMaV1hVkxcQrkG9S Kq6AlBRrCykGbvofbT63tsuxtbuKNsahsDkSXKA0IeynD0CnSk7AHjg4S4aOrg0jkbiq 2TBKTZh2190IaKW6rWziId8lSuHptTBqUpW20S1ktVVf1nxCHdIIUzNwi2O/AbbN9Mbk 1uB9ea3hLNLsYiR7Kkgu1hcYXvP7Jx88KVQCHWI9mUcvm3FhfEUtzH1e72pHQJoUxVBV mmOFfq6Mi7ml6lA3WC0ob3Hx8UkODDtK2VY2+jd05LKLg5+dXVJzn/R2joBdQpNC6Ma3 W8Pg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to :message-id:user-agent:mime-version; bh=dLEtHrmV/EMeSZFsMGSaecd004xqoxaUXD7S3GeP2dA=; b=Qb6vFRH5xoJ9JCUfXL0nyvgdDt0aq0siQTDJDf4sn0uX+Yrn88NLRs0ZzXMUPxjnQ7 lUD0F5t+y25uYBZFmx4JqOul0akS/UjYgQ6o36Do+n0eU7weOwToHjzIYfBHAS/Pcxlt Q8DUYb61Qa8Ve/Qi8FQNciNYKKvxTvEz3moHpU/Ag6r1+LUADE/t5+g5IcHJ890tqarl OTQdj5OGZ8QdSj+d5kMDk5PsPqoKDIB1PRSHYsCbi9HoFBZwO4X4un8HMgNBpf1fyJxt b4nkxJn6ch9zdJouj6rohx7/lO4x9ISQt8lWLtlCHv33f6A3cSjJ2SgIxYt165hHapSH G95A== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAW4Y5Rs069G2ra9Er/qg5xL7bRdXbqkW7T8p9tibliOZVynWyT5 mSd21EkL4lGFbYlVYmXQMDk= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwUpR8Q6IneS8iXFuyK1F/SEFaVc/I3oaVm5wR84asBCL0cFllTMdnOq996OmjMx7ijX9CoHw== X-Received: by 2002:a6b:7e07:: with SMTP id i7mr8526712iom.254.1566436774640; Wed, 21 Aug 2019 18:19:34 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from minid (cbl-45-2-119-34.yyz.frontiernetworks.ca. [45.2.119.34]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q22sm16646486ioj.56.2019.08.21.18.19.33 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Wed, 21 Aug 2019 18:19:33 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: (Stefan Kangas's message of "Wed, 21 Aug 2019 16:46:26 +0200") 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:165547 Archived-At: Stefan Kangas writes: > Noam Postavsky writes: > >> Stefan Kangas writes: >> >> > increase in the memory usage of each undo record, especially when >> > using font-lock-mode. I'm not sure that is a serious problem, since >> > memory is only getting cheaper, but it might be worth investigating. >> > On the other hand, we could just decide that this is not worth the >> > effort and close this as wontfix. >> >> Hmm, it sounds like the problem might just be due to saving text >> properties in the undo records? If so, maybe a simple fix is to just >> drop them (or drop only face and font-lock-face properties). > > Is it not worth saving also that information? Definitely not face, since it's overwritten as soon as font-lock runs. It's true font-lock-face can sometimes be set manually, though usually it's computed by font-lock rules.