From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: marmot-te Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#43573: 26.1; set-process-buffer doesn't create a process marker Date: Sat, 03 Oct 2020 14:13:49 +0000 Message-ID: <87wo07flcy.fsf@host.localdomain> References: <871ritr41x.fsf@host.localdomain> <87a6xfw6ef.fsf@gnus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=-=-=" Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="10893"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: 43573@debbugs.gnu.org To: Lars Ingebrigtsen Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Oct 03 16:15:21 2020 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 1kOiJk-0002ih-Tt for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 03 Oct 2020 16:15:21 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38718 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kOiJj-0004Tw-Dp for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 03 Oct 2020 10:15:19 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:49126) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kOiJS-0004TR-9g for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 03 Oct 2020 10:15:04 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:60975) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kOiJS-00047m-09 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 03 Oct 2020 10:15:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kOiJR-0003gR-Qy for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 03 Oct 2020 10:15:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: marmot-te Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 03 Oct 2020 14:15:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 43573 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: fixed Original-Received: via spool by 43573-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B43573.160173448814127 (code B ref 43573); Sat, 03 Oct 2020 14:15:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 43573) by debbugs.gnu.org; 3 Oct 2020 14:14:48 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44288 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kOiJE-0003fn-3o for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 03 Oct 2020 10:14:48 -0400 Original-Received: from mx1.riseup.net ([198.252.153.129]:50796) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kOiJC-0003ff-H4 for 43573@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 03 Oct 2020 10:14:47 -0400 Original-Received: from bell.riseup.net (bell-pn.riseup.net [10.0.1.178]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.riseup.net", Issuer "Sectigo RSA Domain Validation Secure Server CA" (not verified)) by mx1.riseup.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4C3TQF49QgzFfwy; Sat, 3 Oct 2020 07:14:45 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=riseup.net; s=squak; t=1601734485; bh=YIWNf7Xkmo/WF/zu04/uss7DDATMNPHsYuD8MMmybCQ=; h=References:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-reply-to:Date:From; b=g0QCW6yipatu8oWNWJiVkJpyeC/NXAFOzIabzZhr67eddwrLpXX2QQ+5ffRBaE59/ 5frAgRvsbKeUnlP/N8+2FJdmo7e/ZVgSJnDCH7jmSAmH+SI4t5j80wmUrKK9PDYOdP h4/Sqqah7MioVvjC6VY2kBi/RUxf1cK6RA5tAzWg= X-Riseup-User-ID: 12710F0A3C735C7F87CD9F7C885B47024B5289815018CD8BFED6A9DEC1B39599 Original-Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bell.riseup.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4C3TQD1MlmzJnPB; Sat, 3 Oct 2020 07:14:43 -0700 (PDT) In-reply-to: <87a6xfw6ef.fsf@gnus.org> 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:189698 Archived-At: --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain On Thu, Sep 24 2020, Lars Ingebrigtsen wrote: > marmot-te writes: > >> I noticed that creating a buffer for a process with set-process-buffer >> does not create also a marker specific to that process that can be >> retrieved with process-mark afteward. > > Yes, pretty odd, but it's just a normal marker, I think, so if you want > it to point somewhere else, you can just use do > > (set-marker (process-mark proc) (point-max) buffer) Now I see it it feels so obvious :) > However, while there is some potential for breakage here, I think it > makes sense to have set-process-buffer do this, so I've applied it to > Emacs 28. If this breaks anything (and that is possible -- somebody > could be using `process-mark' as a weird way to keep track of what the > previous buffer was -- it should be reverted. > > I think that's very unlikely, but I guess we'll find out. Ok, thanks you ! -- <:3nn~~ <:3nn~~ <:3nn~~ --=-=-= Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="==-=-=" --==-=-= Content-Type: text/html

On Thu, Sep 24 2020, Lars Ingebrigtsen wrote:

> marmot-te <marmot-te@riseup.net> writes:
>
>> I noticed that creating a buffer for a process with set-process-buffer
>> does not create also a marker specific to that process that can be
>> retrieved with process-mark afteward.
>
> Yes, pretty odd, but it’s just a normal marker, I think, so if you want
> it to point somewhere else, you can just use do
>
> (set-marker (process-mark proc) (point-max) buffer)

Now I see it it feels so obvious :)

> However, while there is some potential for breakage here, I think it
> makes sense to have set-process-buffer do this, so I’ve applied it to
> Emacs 28. If this breaks anything (and that is possible – somebody
> could be using `process-mark’ as a weird way to keep track of what the
> previous buffer was – it should be reverted.
>
> I think that’s very unlikely, but I guess we’ll find out.

Ok, thanks you !

–
<:3nn~~
<:3nn~~
<:3nn~~

--==-=-=-- --=-=-=--