Re: Proposal: move write-contents-functions higher up in basic-save-buffer

[Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>]

[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]

  > I thought that's what I was doing! If a buffer isn't visiting a file,
  > there's essentially no way to guess what "saving it" would mean.

That's true, as a generality.  The only way that "saving" a non-file
buffer could be meaningful is if Emacs is told precisely what saving
should mean for that buffer.

								     The
  > mode that created the buffer would need to provide a function that does
  > the saving. Then basic-save-buffer would need to be taught to call that
  > function, instead of insisting that the buffer have a file.

  > Then it occurred to
  > me that write-contents-functions seems like a good place to do this. Now
  > I'm not sure.

Please try using write-contents-functions for this, and you'll see if it
does the job.  If not, you'll see what more change is needed.

-- 
Dr Richard Stallman
President, Free Software Foundation (gnu.org, fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (internethalloffame.org)
Skype: No way! See stallman.org/skype.html.