Re: when nothing happens, buffer still marked as modified

[Emanuel Berg]

Eli Zaretskii wrote:

>> But how do I determine if the buffer has
>> changed or not? If it has, of course it
>> should be marked `**'!
>
> That's the same problem that M-q has, and it
> leaves the modified status intact. Why not do
> as it does?

I'm not following, "Why not do as it does"?

> You could, of course, save a copy of the
> buffer before the changes, and then compare,
> but why bother?

Don't you think it is confusing, even
incorrect, to have the buffer change status
when the data hasn't changed from the command?

-- 
underground experts united
http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573