[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: undo bug?
From: |
Stefan Monnier |
Subject: |
Re: undo bug? |
Date: |
Wed, 02 Apr 2008 09:59:14 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) |
>>> Couldn't we do away with undo-boundaries and always undo until the next
>>> recorded position of `point'?
>> In theory we could, but that may break various packages: of all the
>> supported undo records, the "undo-boundary" is probably the only one
>> that is used by external packages ;-(
> What I had in mind was that `undo-boundary' would simply `record-point'
> instead of inserting nil.
Yes, that's indeed what I had understood from your earlier message and
what I was responding to. You're remove the undo boundaries (i.e. the
nil entries) and replace them by point-record entries. That would work
fine, except that there are packages out there that look for the
nil entries.
>> Instead the current code tries to only insert a point-record when
>> it's actually necessary.
> Sometimes. For example I use the patch below to handle the (pretty
> annoying) problem that when I redo an earlier insertion `point' ends up
> _before_ the inserted text (my `undo' binds `undo-is-redo' to `equiv'
> when calling `undo-more').
Have you tried to analyze the source of the problem? Maybe there are
cases where we incorrectly decide not to put a point-record even tho it
is needed.
Stefan
- undo bug?, Katsumi Yamaoka, 2008/04/01
- Re: undo bug?, martin rudalics, 2008/04/01
- Re: undo bug?, Katsumi Yamaoka, 2008/04/01
- Re: undo bug?, Stefan Monnier, 2008/04/01
- Re: undo bug?, martin rudalics, 2008/04/01
- Re: undo bug?, Stefan Monnier, 2008/04/02
- Re: undo bug?, martin rudalics, 2008/04/01
- Re: undo bug?,
Stefan Monnier <=
- Re: undo bug?, martin rudalics, 2008/04/02
- Re: undo bug?, Stefan Monnier, 2008/04/03
- Re: undo bug?, martin rudalics, 2008/04/03