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#6525: documentation of macro `with-silent-modifications' 1 Date: Sun, 04 Jul 2010 19:21:50 +0200 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1278266406 3677 80.91.229.12 (4 Jul 2010 18:00:06 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 4 Jul 2010 18:00:06 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 6525@debbugs.gnu.org To: MON KEY Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Jul 04 19:59:56 2010 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 1OVTTp-0007UH-GZ for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 04 Jul 2010 19:59:49 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:32771 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OVTTp-0005eS-3P for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 04 Jul 2010 13:59:49 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=52509 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OVTTj-0005eM-8l for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 04 Jul 2010 13:59:44 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OVTTi-0003ml-1e for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 04 Jul 2010 13:59:42 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:46858) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OVTTi-0003md-0I for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 04 Jul 2010 13:59:42 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OVTFW-00025G-9p; Sun, 04 Jul 2010 13:45:02 -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: Sun, 04 Jul 2010 17:45:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 6525 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 6525-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B6525.12782654897989 (code B ref 6525); Sun, 04 Jul 2010 17:45:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 6525) by debbugs.gnu.org; 4 Jul 2010 17:44:49 +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 1OVTFJ-00024o-AC for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 04 Jul 2010 13:44:49 -0400 Original-Received: from pruche.dit.umontreal.ca ([132.204.246.22]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OVTFG-00024i-Hv for 6525@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 04 Jul 2010 13:44:47 -0400 Original-Received: from alfajor.home (vpn-132-204-232-76.acd.umontreal.ca [132.204.232.76]) by pruche.dit.umontreal.ca (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id o64HidRP000687; Sun, 4 Jul 2010 13:44:40 -0400 Original-Received: by alfajor.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 371FBBB47B; Sun, 4 Jul 2010 19:21:50 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: (MON KEY's message of "Thu, 1 Jul 2010 19:07:14 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-NAI-Spam-Score: 0 X-NAI-Spam-Rules: 1 Rules triggered RV3570=0 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Sun, 04 Jul 2010 13:45:02 -0400 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) 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:38224 Archived-At: > I absolutely can not understand what is meant by the docstring. Here's an another try: Run BODY normally, but don't count its buffer modifications as being buffer modifications. This affects things like buffer-modified-p, checking whether the file is locked by someone else, running buffer modification hooks, ... > What behaviour would you expect them to complain about if they can not > deduce from the docstring what it is they should expect this macro to > do? No idea. They'd make up their own idea of what the macro does, then find it doesn't perform as they expect it, and they complain. That will either let us fix the macro to better reflect their understanding, or improve the docstring to avoid the confusion. >>> the buffer's content. >>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^|^^^^^^ >>> exactly what _is_ content - chars, tps, overlays, fields, faces? >> Can be any of it, depending on the case, because it's a conceptual > Whose conceptual notion, the callers, yours, or Emacs' vis a vis > `buffer-modified-p'? The conceptual notion of the guy who decides to use this macro. In a sense, the use of the macro is a way for the programmer to tell Emacs what is "a real modification" (it does it by telling: anything that happens within BODY is not "a real modification"). Stefan