From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: undo bug? Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2008 11:07:42 -0400 Message-ID: References: <47F21FEB.401@gmx.at> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1207062524 8419 80.91.229.12 (1 Apr 2008 15:08:44 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2008 15:08:44 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Katsumi Yamaoka , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: martin rudalics Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Apr 01 17:09:14 2008 Return-path: 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 1Jgi69-0002G6-Rf for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 01 Apr 2008 17:08:30 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Jgi5X-0005o4-Oy for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 01 Apr 2008 11:07:51 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Jgi5U-0005ns-03 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Apr 2008 11:07:48 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Jgi5S-0005nP-Ap for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Apr 2008 11:07:47 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Jgi5S-0005nM-6B for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Apr 2008 11:07:46 -0400 Original-Received: from pruche.dit.umontreal.ca ([132.204.246.22]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Jgi5R-0004Mf-Rx for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Apr 2008 11:07:45 -0400 Original-Received: from ceviche.home (vpn-132-204-232-175.acd.umontreal.ca [132.204.232.175]) by pruche.dit.umontreal.ca (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m31F7ud9032532 for ; Tue, 1 Apr 2008 11:07:56 -0400 Original-Received: by ceviche.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 15E5BB40F9; Tue, 1 Apr 2008 11:07:42 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <47F21FEB.401@gmx.at> (martin rudalics's message of "Tue, 01 Apr 2008 13:43:39 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) X-NAI-Spam-Score: -2.5 X-NAI-Spam-Rules: 1 Rules triggered BAYES_00=-2.5 X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-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:94120 Archived-At: > does what you want here? If it solves your problem then we probably > should consider a solution like the one I sketched in > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnu-emacs/2008-03/msg00096.html I'm wondering why we have to use last_point_position. It seems to be asking for problems because it is delimited by command processing, whereas the undo records are delimited by undo-boundary: there is a correlation between the two, but no equivalence. I.e. I suggest we introduce last_undo_boundary_pos and use it in place of last_point_position in undo.c. It'd be set to PT in Fundo_boundary (which could/should also set last_undo_buffer). WDYT? Stefan