From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: John Wiegley Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#13949: 24.4.1; `fill-paragraph' should not always put the buffer as modified Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2016 16:46:49 -0700 Message-ID: References: <56F12360.5030301@ro.ru> <83y49a4hga.fsf@gnu.org> <56F1837D.4060300@ro.ru> <83io0e4b5r.fsf@gnu.org> <56F19203.5040501@ro.ru> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1459036043 324 80.91.229.3 (26 Mar 2016 23:47:23 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2016 23:47:23 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 13949@debbugs.gnu.org To: Jaakov Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Mar 27 00:47:12 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ajxvD-0001Ry-9k for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 27 Mar 2016 00:47:11 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:34054 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ajxvB-0003PT-Sc for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 26 Mar 2016 19:47:09 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:44523) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ajxv8-0003PL-93 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 26 Mar 2016 19:47:07 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ajxv4-0008KV-SC for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 26 Mar 2016 19:47:06 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:41865) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ajxv4-0008KP-OZ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 26 Mar 2016 19:47:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ajxv4-0004e0-FA for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 26 Mar 2016 19:47:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: John Wiegley Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2016 23:47:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 13949 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 13949-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B13949.145903602117846 (code B ref 13949); Sat, 26 Mar 2016 23:47:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 13949) by debbugs.gnu.org; 26 Mar 2016 23:47:01 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38992 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ajxv3-0004dl-F6 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 26 Mar 2016 19:47:01 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-pf0-f174.google.com ([209.85.192.174]:33223) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ajxv0-0004dY-VG for 13949@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 26 Mar 2016 19:46:59 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-pf0-f174.google.com with SMTP id 4so108761048pfd.0 for <13949@debbugs.gnu.org>; Sat, 26 Mar 2016 16:46:58 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:date:message-id:references :user-agent:mime-version; bh=G2bBp05XbEx8dgPBMqOQ+j8qAbBqN37Wg8WqrpegxhU=; b=z16eR0bJ5JQxBSTBu3Sob61yhWVl+5iInXsZtshjm2aTv1XgnSrYGuiLB+bIkNsrQt Q/1vl/uDgkILRwyjp2K6rFVw147eMKkIr7I9hUn2SRTIIL70Dcy3GO5/zZlTEW65tkCn GtRn68FR9tZdqS/FnLRav5cvPsRZIq0gsmGOrKT00ycyGqG/L63OZKOV9RDN4bsM4yk7 wOmGxiQweO1ClmrXYlRh9m3V7BHKi8anN7Z6rVMKbebrRBxI4kJvRvL5BW+u1IhJKtYB qP1qOt26dLptfgrhVru09lNvUmBd3vS/+CapsxJhKhEfy8deQ6kt2SxY9kmZyBUus86k /rlg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:date:message-id :references:user-agent:mime-version; bh=G2bBp05XbEx8dgPBMqOQ+j8qAbBqN37Wg8WqrpegxhU=; b=lvc2wg+ahFzn8DkQgCy+BA6VspCLBAQ4/aUYliYFT2aT1Y1PFUA7zExfaCSyaqkJX6 MYtSAXUYd+Tigjqx3qnhNM1anJCOz3I5ykT4R/EcTmuzxbM5DmcCcw8gBhPKvgB5hKId mjuTKDpRLlbsSnzt6rUxcjhCFLdRayzvZmgZoAoLu4ih5gRNmBdHA+hrey0tKkJeZp0a rcLX3lNQ3fxmZSUVtxiln4NE3qmgivRqWPyVwoId2/PSa21ucuEFjUVgWao7O4fMn28c FJ65JvVmc91Kx4Xil8o21QgEYfvpQTF5agwtrg33t3az6EzKNd78iOCOHTcl1TLATuI5 E0lA== X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJInY88K8T1Q4BJVrNQAsbYj9UcW8vN5B0PvKWr1UAH/xTAr0onKsSKZR42tjG7l5g== X-Received: by 10.98.34.200 with SMTP id p69mr31430935pfj.114.1459036013197; Sat, 26 Mar 2016 16:46:53 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from Hermes.local (76-234-68-79.lightspeed.frokca.sbcglobal.net. [76.234.68.79]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h2sm25381958pfd.91.2016.03.26.16.46.52 (version=TLS1 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 26 Mar 2016 16:46:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Original-From: "John Wiegley" Original-Received: by Hermes.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id C85C54FB44D6; Sat, 26 Mar 2016 16:46:51 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <56F19203.5040501@ro.ru> (Jaakov's message of "Tue, 22 Mar 2016 19:42:11 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.130014 (Ma Gnus v0.14) Emacs/25.0.92 (darwin) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 208.118.235.43 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: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:115526 Archived-At: severity 13949 wishlist thanks >>>>> Jaakov writes: > I don't consider the previous argument for disagreement valid for the > mentioned reasons. Hi Jaakov, Eli does not have to convince you of anything: If he wants to work on a bug, he will; if he doesn't, he won't. Setting the priority does not determine what our developers decide to work on, it only serves as a general classification. So you are welcome to express your thoughts on the relevance of a bug, but there is no cause for argument; also, please stop adjusting bug priorities. As to your point, I like the distinction you're making. In fact, one could imagine a guarding form that could be used by functions like `fill-paragraph': (modified-only-if-changed FORM) This would save the current buffer-modification flag, and perform some check at the end to verify changes were actually made before allowing it to be set (such as checking the textual content of a filled region for real textual modifications). However, while great intellectually, this does have it downsides: 1. The complexity of our code is increased for a problem that is not severe. 2. There is a performance cost, especially if the fill region is huge. So we must ask ourselves: What will fixing this issue actually solve? We'd no longer modify timestamps when unnecessary, and the user wouldn't feel compelled to save at times when it is not needed. That is all I can think of. Therefore, this bug is truly a wishlist item. I've noticed over the past couple of decades that M-q always sets my modified flag. It never once occurred to me that this should be considered a problem. -- John Wiegley GPG fingerprint = 4710 CF98 AF9B 327B B80F http://newartisans.com 60E1 46C4 BD1A 7AC1 4BA2