From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#5937: 23.1.95; why saving empty abbrev tables Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2011 11:09:34 -0400 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1301359075 9036 80.91.229.12 (29 Mar 2011 00:37:55 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 00:37:55 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 5937@debbugs.gnu.org To: Leo Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Mar 29 02:37:51 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Q4MwQ-0002ee-17 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 29 Mar 2011 02:37:50 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58314 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Q4MwP-0000px-D1 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 28 Mar 2011 20:37:49 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=39275 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Q4Mvp-0000Xh-H3 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 28 Mar 2011 20:37:14 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q4Mvn-00059C-Np for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 28 Mar 2011 20:37:13 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:58709) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q4Mvn-000596-Iv for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 28 Mar 2011 20:37:11 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Q4Mqn-0004rL-Nl; Mon, 28 Mar 2011 20:32:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Stefan Monnier Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-To: owner@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 00:32:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 5937 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 5937-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B5937.130135869418640 (code B ref 5937); Tue, 29 Mar 2011 00:32:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 5937) by debbugs.gnu.org; 29 Mar 2011 00:31:34 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Q4MqL-0004qb-Bz for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 28 Mar 2011 20:31:33 -0400 Original-Received: from pruche.dit.umontreal.ca ([132.204.246.22]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Q4MqI-0004qN-WA for 5937@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 28 Mar 2011 20:31:31 -0400 Original-Received: from ceviche.home (lechon.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.27.242]) by pruche.dit.umontreal.ca (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id p2T0VO6v014102; Mon, 28 Mar 2011 20:31:25 -0400 Original-Received: by ceviche.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 4750666350; Mon, 28 Mar 2011 11:09:34 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Leo's message of "Mon, 28 Mar 2011 22:26:43 +0800") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-NAI-Spam-Flag: NO X-NAI-Spam-Threshold: 5 X-NAI-Spam-Score: 0 X-NAI-Spam-Rules: 1 Rules triggered RV3810=0 X-NAI-Spam-Version: 2.2.0.9286 : core <3810> : streams <614376> : uri <837528> X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2011 20:32:01 -0400 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 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: , Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:45446 Archived-At: >> write-abbrev-file may be called from a non-"edit-abbrevs" buffer >> (e.g. from save-some-buffer), so I think that calling >> edit-abbrevs-redefine from it is problematic. Is there a particular >> reason why you put the call to edit-abbrevs-redefine in >> write-abbrev-file rather than in abbrev-save-buffer. > Good point. I missed it. I want C-x C-w to also redefine the abbrevs if > it is called in that editing buffer. Do you mind if I do something like > the following in write-abbrev-file: > (and (derived-mode-p 'edit-abbrevs-mode) > (edit-abbrevs-redefine)) I'd rather call edit-abbrevs-redefine from the new command you'll bind to C-x C-w. Stefan