From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
Subject: Re: pending-undo-list - should it not be buffer local?
Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2007 16:42:33 -0400
Message-ID: <E1HXkPB-0003a1-UC@fencepost.gnu.org>
References: <460DB19B.30102@gmail.com>
Reply-To: rms@gnu.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15
X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1175374035 32383 80.91.229.12 (31 Mar 2007 20:47:15 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2007 20:47:15 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
To: "Lennart Borgman (gmail)" <lennart.borgman@gmail.com>
Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Mar 31 22:47:12 2007
Return-path: <emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org
Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165])
	by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50)
	id 1HXkTe-000106-Of
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 31 Mar 2007 22:47:10 +0200
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
	id 1HXkWU-0005N0-Od
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 31 Mar 2007 15:50:06 -0500
Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1HXkUC-0004HE-DT
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 31 Mar 2007 16:47:44 -0400
Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1HXkUB-0004Gi-Rn
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 31 Mar 2007 16:47:43 -0400
Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HXkUB-0004Ge-HG
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 31 Mar 2007 15:47:43 -0500
Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164])
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <rms@gnu.org>) id 1HXkRK-00084D-RX
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 31 Mar 2007 16:44:46 -0400
Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <rms@gnu.org>)
	id 1HXkPB-0003a1-UC; Sat, 31 Mar 2007 16:42:33 -0400
In-reply-to: <460DB19B.30102@gmail.com> (lennart.borgman@gmail.com)
X-detected-kernel: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4)
X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." <emacs-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/emacs-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:68854
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel/68854>

    Should not pending-undo-list be permanent buffer local?

As far as I can see, it cannot ever make a difference.  That variable
is only used within a sequence of consecutive undo commands, and they
don't change the major mode.