Re: Message buffer time-stamps

[Richard Stallman]

    I see several variables are protected from GC in `message_dolog'
    as well as in functions that call it.  I suppose that is already done
    with the expectation of possible GC in `message_dolog'.

Yes, it seems to try to protect itself.  I just examined its callers,
and they seem to be safe too.

    > However, I'd suggest instead using an idle timer to check that
    > a message has been added, and to add a timestamp.

    I don't understand how timers can help to insert message timestamp.
    When a timer calls its function it will insert too late timestamp.

It would be a little inexact, using the time when the command ends,
but it would be no big deal.

However, since your idea seems to safe, it is better to use
your idea.

    > There is another issue.  Right now there's a feature to combine
    > repeated messages.  If you put time stamps in the buffer, that would
    > break this feature, unless the time stamp code takes pains to keep
    > it working.

    This is right.  Time stamps should break this feature.  Every repeated
    message should have its own time stamp.

Well, if you're sure you want that, I won't argue.  But I would not
want that to be the default.