On Sat, Jun 6, 2009 at 12:48 AM, Lennart
Borgman<lennart.borgman@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Sigh, and my suggestion was of course unnecessary stupid. What is
> needed is of course to record values and frame+buffer localness and
> dito values and reset them. Nothing less than this will ever work
> correctly, or?
>
> And does not this apply to all uses of specbind + unbind_to?
>
> Can it be sufficient to just change specbind and unbind_to? Is there
> anything else that will be affected by changes in the specbind stack?
> Since info about buffer+frame is alwas needed should specbinding be
> changed to the below form?
>
> struct specbinding
>  {
>    Lisp_Object symbol;
>    Lisp_Object old_value;
>    Lisp_Object old_buffer_value;
>    Lisp_Object old_frame_value;
>    specbinding_func func;
>    Lisp_Object unused;         /* Dividing by 16 is faster than by 12 */
>    Lisp_Object unused;
>    Lisp_Object unused;
>  };

Here is a bit modified suggestion and some code where I try to
implement it. Please notice that I have not tested the code. It is
very possible that I have misunderstood something so please look at
the code.

struct specbinding
  {
    Lisp_Object symbol;
    Lisp_Object old_value;
    specbinding_func func;
    // total 8 fields
    Lisp_Object need_test_local;
    Lisp_Object old_buffer;
    Lisp_Object old_buffer_value;
    Lisp_Object old_frame;
    Lisp_Object old_frame_value;
    //Lisp_Object unused;		/* Dividing by 16 is faster than by 12 */
  };