From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Drew Adams Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#13949: 24.4.1; `fill-paragraph' should not always put the buffer as modified Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2016 11:22:59 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <56F12360.5030301@ro.ru> <83y49a4hga.fsf@gnu.org> <56F1837D.4060300@ro.ru> <83io0e4b5r.fsf@gnu.org> <56F19203.5040501@ro.ru> <87a8lkd2bc.fsf@wanadoo.es> <83lh54ynol.fsf@gnu.org> <87mvpkaqj9.fsf@wanadoo.es> <37404e91-f1bf-072c-ff05-a3070391003e@yandex.ru> <87a8ljc3zx.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87vb47ao2k.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87io07amxo.fsf@wanadoo.es> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1459103062 13034 80.91.229.3 (27 Mar 2016 18:24:22 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2016 18:24:22 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 13949@debbugs.gnu.org To: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen , =?UTF-8?Q?=C3=93scar?= Fuentes Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Mar 27 20:24:09 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@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 1akFM9-0003F1-32 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 27 Mar 2016 20:24:09 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:36942 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1akFM8-0006Zt-4s for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 27 Mar 2016 14:24:08 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35082) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1akFM5-0006ZK-4D for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 27 Mar 2016 14:24:06 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1akFM1-0000Kt-TV for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 27 Mar 2016 14:24:05 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:43275) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1akFM1-0000Kp-Pz for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 27 Mar 2016 14:24:01 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1akFM1-0001Vu-JN for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 27 Mar 2016 14:24:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Drew Adams Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2016 18:24:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 13949 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 13949-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B13949.14591029915751 (code B ref 13949); Sun, 27 Mar 2016 18:24:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 13949) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Mar 2016 18:23:11 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40402 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1akFLD-0001Uh-6M for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 27 Mar 2016 14:23:11 -0400 Original-Received: from aserp1040.oracle.com ([141.146.126.69]:25567) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1akFLB-0001UV-S5 for 13949@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 27 Mar 2016 14:23:10 -0400 Original-Received: from aserv0021.oracle.com (aserv0021.oracle.com [141.146.126.233]) by aserp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id u2RIN1qF003061 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Sun, 27 Mar 2016 18:23:02 GMT Original-Received: from userv0121.oracle.com (userv0121.oracle.com [156.151.31.72]) by aserv0021.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u2RIN0uv019052 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Sun, 27 Mar 2016 18:23:01 GMT Original-Received: from abhmp0013.oracle.com (abhmp0013.oracle.com [141.146.116.19]) by userv0121.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u2RIMxQE006943; Sun, 27 Mar 2016 18:23:00 GMT In-Reply-To: X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9 (901082) [OL 12.0.6744.5000 (x86)] X-Source-IP: aserv0021.oracle.com [141.146.126.233] X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 208.118.235.43 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:115601 Archived-At: > But, come to think of it, I think it's quite rare in practice to do a > lot of text property related editing without changing the size of the > buffer, so perhaps this doesn't matter much. I mean, if you have a work > flow that involves you opening a 2GB file, and then placing text > properties (unrelated to font-locking) all over the place without > changing the buffer otherwise, then... you're probably kinda unusual? Why do you think that? Code that uses text properties does not necessarily change other things in the buffer. I see no connection between the two. The fact that you even added "unrelated to font-locking" is perhaps a giveaway. Font-locking is the best known use of text properties. And even it does not typically involve changing other things in the buffer. Why would you expect that other code that uses text properties would be different? What's so special about font-locking in this regard? If anything, I would expect other code that uses text properties to _not_ change the buffer otherwise - just like font-lock. I say "if anything", because I don't really think there is any connection between using text properties and other buffer changes. > So the "only hash when the buffer size is the same as when you loaded > the file" thing would probably avoid the hashing in more than 99% of > the use cases. Why? Where do you get 99%? Or even 25%? On what do you base the assumption that code that uses text properties also makes other buffer changes? What do you see as the use cases of text properties, of which 99% change the buffer otherwise?