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: save-excursion again Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 11:29:05 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87k4pwphfi.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1276874965 30089 80.91.229.12 (18 Jun 2010 15:29:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 15:29:25 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: David Kastrup Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jun 18 17:29:24 2010 connect(): No such file or directory 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 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OPdVT-0002zr-3W for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 18 Jun 2010 17:29:23 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49683 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OPdVS-0003p0-Aa for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 18 Jun 2010 11:29:22 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=42630 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OPdVG-0003le-FF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 18 Jun 2010 11:29:11 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OPdVF-0002nZ-8N for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 18 Jun 2010 11:29:10 -0400 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.181]:31242 helo=ironport2-out.pppoe.ca) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OPdVD-0002nD-Mj; Fri, 18 Jun 2010 11:29:07 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvsEAF4tG0xLd+Hj/2dsb2JhbACfEHLCPYUbBI0Y X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.53,440,1272859200"; d="scan'208";a="68357234" Original-Received: from 75-119-225-227.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO pastel.home) ([75.119.225.227]) by ironport2-out.pppoe.ca with ESMTP; 18 Jun 2010 11:29:06 -0400 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 2B1187F26; Fri, 18 Jun 2010 11:29:05 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <87k4pwphfi.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> (David Kastrup's message of "Fri, 18 Jun 2010 16:02:41 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. 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:126177 Archived-At: > I don't see how this process is supposed to terminate if users find > counterexamples. Presumably the original code is then reinstated, and > the whole procedure starts from the beginning. No, when we find a bug we replace the code with something *else*. Typically we replace (with-current-buffer B ...) by (with-current-buffer B (save-excursion ...)), or is some other case we have to replace it with (save-excursion B (with-current-buffer ...)). > It would not appear that there is a way to _intentionally_ use that > construct without you eventually replacing it. That's right. Stefan