bug#18: Fine-grained revert-buffer

[Lars Ingebrigtsen]

Mauro Aranda <maurooaranda@gmail.com> writes:

> I spent some time thinking on how to get this new revert command
> integrated with the rest of revert-buffer functions, and I came up with
> the attached patch.
>
> Since the difference between revert-buffer and
> revert-buffer-with-fine-grain lies at the insert-file-contents level, I
> wrote an alternative to
> revert-buffer-insert-file-contents--default-function, that uses
> replace-buffer-contents, as Eli suggested.  I named it
> revert-buffer-insert-file-contents-delicately.

[...]

> Corrections and comments are welcome.  Better names too.

This was the final message in this thread (which is the oldest
still-open bug report in debbugs!).

I tried the patch out, and it almost worked flawlessly for me -- it did
the "really edit the buffer?" userlock thing, but that was easy enough
to disable, so I did that.

And I pushed the patch set to the trunk.  I agree that perhaps the
command name isn't the most intuitive, so somebody with stronger ideas
about what the name of the command should be should go ahead and change
it.

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no