From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Artur Malabarba Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: Apparent regression on the undo command Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2015 10:06:49 +0000 Message-ID: References: <87bnarsdfy.fsf@russet.org.uk> <871tbm9v83.fsf@russet.org.uk> <87wpte6slz.fsf@russet.org.uk> <87io4xpio3.fsf@red-bean.com> Reply-To: bruce.connor.am@gmail.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c2636aae0d5b0524f60835 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1448014048 32250 80.91.229.3 (20 Nov 2015 10:07:28 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2015 10:07:28 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Karl Fogel , Phillip Lord , emacs-devel To: Phillip Lord Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Nov 20 11:07:27 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Zzib0-00010V-AI for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 20 Nov 2015 11:07:10 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:46338 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zziaz-0005FC-SO for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 20 Nov 2015 05:07:09 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:47372) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zziai-0005Ev-G8 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 20 Nov 2015 05:06:53 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zziah-00058n-9f for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 20 Nov 2015 05:06:52 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-lb0-x231.google.com ([2a00:1450:4010:c04::231]:33027) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zziag-00058h-Uk for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 20 Nov 2015 05:06:51 -0500 Original-Received: by lbbkw15 with SMTP id kw15so59243541lbb.0 for ; Fri, 20 Nov 2015 02:06:49 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:reply-to:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=ZQvT0teJGMPYRs5myetU+oMGi/MXSLr6yw8Xj8hL18E=; b=r3kZOf3NIly0bVQdUrJ5XzCalVNK40Zzz7MPFYZ0TEOmN/2wDpM7n0ibMoNwDc9Ddo ihbjH0Z1czXg1xo1qMJlyIHZ/tBDCo0L9mo8QSLFhuhWuUq5uETJEtsipw8eAypKSV+B HFk/MTE4nKgVkh+/nuNEGvoOYdqHspGsGOZW7GPOhJj6KCMvf1DollmcskUxQ9iqfw4n FYAApxxgkXnmokYgSE8YYl6UjEUz8XOks7997tk1YyO8NNQTyoTPz0LEIbr1RpLYGC8y +cx2o6pL5X3dWhVuKfJ+ePhVQx+d9LpYLkndXEmDyvtURWDXLEFiE3zmrjaISvJrnfQH tFww== X-Received: by 10.112.170.7 with SMTP id ai7mr521721lbc.102.1448014009730; Fri, 20 Nov 2015 02:06:49 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by 10.112.202.99 with HTTP; Fri, 20 Nov 2015 02:06:49 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by 10.112.202.99 with HTTP; Fri, 20 Nov 2015 02:06:49 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: X-Google-Sender-Auth: 4zcT3tAYLJ09ACu38gRIux7OPM4 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2a00:1450:4010:c04::231 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:194862 Archived-At: --001a11c2636aae0d5b0524f60835 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 No problem Phil. Thanks for looking into this. On 20 Nov 2015 7:51 am, "Phillip Lord" wrote: > > It is my commit after all. I will work on it as soon as I can. Had a nasty > cold for the last few days. > > Phil > ________________________________________ > From: emacs-devel-bounces+phillip.lord=newcastle.ac.uk@gnu.org > [emacs-devel-bounces+phillip.lord=newcastle.ac.uk@gnu.org] on behalf of > Karl Fogel [kfogel@red-bean.com] > Sent: 20 November 2015 01:24 > To: Phillip Lord > Cc: Artur Malabarba; emacs-devel > Subject: Re: Apparent regression on the undo command > > phillip.lord@russet.org.uk (Phillip Lord) writes: > >Artur Malabarba writes: > >> 2015-11-19 9:47 GMT+00:00 Phillip Lord : > >>> I'll try and see if I can automate the problem and > >>> run a bisect. > >> > >> The following works for me. When called on the *scratch* buffer it > >> returns non-nil if the problem occurs. > >> > >> (progn > >> (kmacro-call-macro nil nil nil [134217788 11 14 14 11 67108911]) > >> (equal (point-min) (point))) > >> > >> That macro simply calls M-< C-k C-n C-n C-k C-/ > > > > > >I tried various combinations -- works interactively but fails in batch > >either because *scratch* hasn't been initialized, or undo appears to > >work wrongly. > > > >No worries, it's easy enough to test by hand, and am doing so. > > Any luck? FWIW I'm noticing the bug too, in emacs-25 branch built from > commit c210b8b128c. > > Best regards, > -Karl > > --001a11c2636aae0d5b0524f60835 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

No problem Phil.
Thanks for looking into this.

On 20 Nov 2015 7:51 am, "Phillip Lord"= <phillip.lord@newcastle= .ac.uk> wrote:
newcastle.ac.uk@gnu.org [emacs-devel-bounces+phillip.lord=3Dnewcastle.ac.uk@gnu.org] on be= half of Karl Fogel [kfogel@red-bean.= com]
Sent: 20 November 2015 01:24
To: Phillip Lord
Cc: Artur Malabarba; emacs-devel
Subject: Re: Apparent regression on the undo command

phillip.lord@russet.org.uk (Phillip Lord) writes:
>Artur Malabarba <bruce.= connor.am@gmail.com> writes:
>> 2015-11-19 9:47 GMT+00:00 Phillip Lord <phillip.lord@russet.org.uk>:
>>> I'll try and see if I can automate the problem and
>>> run a bisect.
>>
>> The following works for me. When called on the *scratch* buffer it=
>> returns non-nil if the problem occurs.
>>
>> (progn
>>=C2=A0 =C2=A0(kmacro-call-macro nil nil nil [134217788 11 14 14 11 = 67108911])
>>=C2=A0 =C2=A0(equal (point-min) (point)))
>>
>> That macro simply calls M-< C-k C-n C-n C-k C-/
>
>
>I tried various combinations -- works interactively but fails in batch<= br> >either because *scratch* hasn't been initialized, or undo appears t= o
>work wrongly.
>
>No worries, it's easy enough to test by hand, and am doing so.

Any luck?=C2=A0 FWIW I'm noticing the bug too, in emacs-25 branch built= from commit c210b8b128c.

Best regards,
-Karl

--001a11c2636aae0d5b0524f60835--