[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Lisp primitives and their calling of the change hooks
From: |
Alan Mackenzie |
Subject: |
Re: Lisp primitives and their calling of the change hooks |
Date: |
Fri, 5 Jan 2018 13:34:48 +0000 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.7.2 (2016-11-26) |
Hello, Eli.
On Fri, Jan 05, 2018 at 15:00:21 +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2018 11:41:07 +0000
> > Cc: address@hidden, address@hidden
> > From: Alan Mackenzie <address@hidden>
> > The "complex primitive" case can be distinguised from the "atomic
> > primitive" case because either the call to `after-change-functions'
> > is missing (i.e. there are two consecutive calls to
> > `before-change-functions'), or in the first call to
> > `after-change-functions', `OLD-LEN' is less then `END' - `BEG' in
> > `before-change-functions'.
> > The above leaves unsaid what happens when a "complex primitive" happens
> > to call b-c-f and a-c-f as though it were an "atomic primitive".
> It also provides no way to know, up front, whether a given primitive
> I'm about to call, is one or the other. IMO, we need some way of
> doing that, if we want to document this distinction.
Do we really need this level of detail? My idea was to enable users of
b-c-f and a-c-f to predict what they're going to be being hit with.
There are two patterns of handling b/a-c-f, the "atomic" and the
"complex". My above proposal documents enough for somebody using
b/a-c-f to be able to handle the "atomic" and "complex" uses.
Why does that hacker need to know exactly what each buffer-changing
primitive does, or which falls into which category? Surely it is enough
that she handle the b/a-c-f calls appropriately.
What am I missing here?
--
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).
- Re: Lisp primitives and their calling of the change hooks, (continued)
- Re: Lisp primitives and their calling of the change hooks, Clément Pit-Claudel, 2018/01/10
- Re: Lisp primitives and their calling of the change hooks, Alan Mackenzie, 2018/01/10
- Re: Lisp primitives and their calling of the change hooks, Stefan Monnier, 2018/01/07
- Re: Lisp primitives and their calling of the change hooks, Alan Mackenzie, 2018/01/07
- Re: Lisp primitives and their calling of the change hooks, Eli Zaretskii, 2018/01/07
- Re: Lisp primitives and their calling of the change hooks, Eli Zaretskii, 2018/01/05
- Re: Lisp primitives and their calling of the change hooks, Alan Mackenzie, 2018/01/05
- Re: Lisp primitives and their calling of the change hooks, Eli Zaretskii, 2018/01/05
- Re: Lisp primitives and their calling of the change hooks,
Alan Mackenzie <=
- Re: Lisp primitives and their calling of the change hooks, Eli Zaretskii, 2018/01/05
- Re: Lisp primitives and their calling of the change hooks, Alan Mackenzie, 2018/01/05
- Re: Lisp primitives and their calling of the change hooks, Stefan Monnier, 2018/01/05
- Re: Lisp primitives and their calling of the change hooks, Alan Mackenzie, 2018/01/05
- Re: Lisp primitives and their calling of the change hooks, Stefan Monnier, 2018/01/05
- Re: Lisp primitives and their calling of the change hooks, Eli Zaretskii, 2018/01/05
- Re: Lisp primitives and their calling of the change hooks, Stefan Monnier, 2018/01/05
- Re: Lisp primitives and their calling of the change hooks, Eli Zaretskii, 2018/01/06
- Re: Lisp primitives and their calling of the change hooks, Stefan Monnier, 2018/01/06