From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Chong Yidong Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#1175: 23.0.60; bookmark code regression Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2008 12:54:56 -0400 Message-ID: <87ljwhsxb3.fsf@cyd.mit.edu> Reply-To: Chong Yidong , 1175@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1224609064 15773 80.91.229.12 (21 Oct 2008 17:11:04 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2008 17:11:04 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 1175@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com To: "Drew Adams" Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Oct 21 19:12:02 2008 connect(): Connection refused Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KsKlV-0001Z2-N9 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 19:11:30 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58430 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KsKkQ-0007VP-A9 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 13:10:22 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KsKkE-0007QM-7H for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 13:10:10 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KsKkC-0007PV-F9 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 13:10:09 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=53044 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KsKkC-0007PR-8U for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 13:10:08 -0400 Original-Received: from rzlab.ucr.edu ([138.23.92.77]:47136) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KsKkB-0002o8-VI for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 13:10:08 -0400 Original-Received: from rzlab.ucr.edu (rzlab.ucr.edu [127.0.0.1]) by rzlab.ucr.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8/Debian-3) with ESMTP id m9LHA1qp012521; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 10:10:01 -0700 Original-Received: (from debbugs@localhost) by rzlab.ucr.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8/Submit) id m9LH03A6009411; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 10:00:03 -0700 X-Loop: don@donarmstrong.com Resent-From: Chong Yidong Resent-To: bug-submit-list@donarmstrong.com Resent-CC: Emacs Bugs Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2008 17:00:03 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: don@donarmstrong.com X-Emacs-PR-Message: report 1175 X-Emacs-PR-Package: emacs X-Emacs-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 1175-submit@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com id=B1175.12246080978179 (code B ref 1175); Tue, 21 Oct 2008 17:00:03 +0000 Original-Received: (at 1175) by emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com; 21 Oct 2008 16:54:57 +0000 Original-Received: from cyd.mit.edu (CYD.MIT.EDU [18.115.2.24]) by rzlab.ucr.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8/Debian-3) with ESMTP id m9LGssds008173 for <1175@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com>; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 09:54:55 -0700 Original-Received: by cyd.mit.edu (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 08FA257E0BD; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 12:54:56 -0400 (EDT) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2008 13:10:09 -0400 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:21756 Archived-At: > Please, please restore the sane behavior of `bookmark-jump-noselect' > as it was for Emacs 22: it should return a cons (BUFFER . POINT) when > a bookmark is located. I discussed with Stefan. Since bookmark-jump-noselect is an internal function of bookmark.el, we don't guarantee that its behavior is unchanged across Emacs versions. Furthermore, the bookmark-jump-noselect not only returned (BUFFER . POINT) but also preserved the current buffer (and point) instead of changing buffer and moving point, whereas the new version does change buffer and point. So it doesn't make sense to change the return value of the new version.