[debbugs-tracker] bug#23567: closed (find-function-search-for-symbol of find-func.el leaves point moved but should not)

[GNU bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Tue, 24 May 2016 00:17:01 +0300
with message-id <address@hidden>
and subject line Re: bug#23567: find-function-search-for-symbol of find-func.el 
leaves point moved but should not
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #23567,
regarding find-function-search-for-symbol of find-func.el leaves point moved 
but should not
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
address@hidden)


-- 
23567: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=23567
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact address@hidden with problems

--- Begin Message --- Subject: find-function-search-for-symbol of find-func.el leaves point moved but should not Date: Tue, 17 May 2016 15:51:40 -0400

find-function-search-for-symbol in find-func.el is called for its

return value and not for side-effects but presently it moves point

around in the buffers it affects.  It needs some save-excursion

protection.  This is true for the most recent 25.1 release I looked at

and I don't think any changes have been made to it since then.

One example of where this causes a problem is in xref-location-marker

of elisp-mode.el.  Again, that is called simply to return the marker

but because it calls find-function-search-for-symbol, it can move

point and cause other problems.

It would be best if someone familiar with this first function made the

change to ensure it is correct.

--- End Message ---

> --- Begin Message ---
>
>
>
> Subject: 
>
> Re: bug#23567: find-function-search-for-symbol of find-func.el leaves point moved but should not
>
>
>
>
> Date: 
>
> Tue, 24 May 2016 00:17:01 +0300
>
>
>
>
> User-agent: 
>
> Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.1
>
>
>
>
> On 05/23/2016 08:53 PM, Robert Weiner wrote:
>
> > As of Emacs 25.0.94, I can no longer replicate the problem, so some
> > updates must have fixed it.  Great.  Please close this issue.
>
> Good to hear, closing. And that why we usually ask for the reproduction 
> scenario in bug reports, not just "this code doesn't look right to me".
>
> I don't think any of the recent changes fixed this. Even as we discussed 
> this issue in private (a couple of weeks ago?), I tried to produce a 
> problem scenario, and failed.
>
>
>
> --- End Message ---