Re: [cvs] bug when using pc-selection-mode/transient-mark-mode

[Stefan Monnier]

> Is this too expensive a thing to take place in switch-to-buffer?

You must mean `set-buffer' ?

> > So maybe we should not make it buffer-local but instead make it hold
> > a list of buffers whose mark should be deactivated.
> > Currently we only use t or nil where t means "current-buffer".
> 
> Doesn't that require all the places where deactivate-mark is set to be
> changed (in a non-trivial way)?

Yes, except that we can still accept t as a special value meaning
`current-buffer', such that code that's not updated will not break
Emacs (it will just make it behave as it does now, which isn't
perfect but isn't terrible either).

> Sounds very annoying for programmers... [and a maintainance headache]

But since it can be made backward-compatible it's not such a big deal.
And (as you noticed) deactivate-mark is rarely set explicitly anyway.


        Stefan