[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#34765: 26.1; with-temp-buffer should not run buffer-list-update-hook
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
bug#34765: 26.1; with-temp-buffer should not run buffer-list-update-hook |
Date: |
Wed, 22 May 2019 10:29:57 +0300 |
> From: martin rudalics <rudalics@gmx.at>
> Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>, 34765@debbugs.gnu.org, alexanderm@web.de,
> monnier@IRO.UMontreal.CA
> Date: Tue, 21 May 2019 12:04:46 +0200
>
> I have not managed to understand the Vcode_conversion_workbuf_name
> vs Vcode_conversion_reused_workbuf rigmarole yet.
The latter is a fixed buffer, created once and never killed. So the
buffer hooks never run for it, and never affect Emacs. By contrast,
the former is a buffer created when the reused buffer is busy and
cannot be reused. We then kill Vcode_conversion_workbuf_name when we
no longer need it. Thus, buffer hooks run for these work buffers all
the time, and for a code-conversion intensive code they could slow
down Emacs, specially if the list of buffer hooks is long.
> > The possibilities for the buffer creation subroutine are either to act
> > specially on certain buffer name prefixes, or to accept an extra
> > argument indicating what to do, no? Are there any others? There was
> > mention of exposing a buffer-local variable to Elisp, but IIRC setting
> > that after creating the buffer would already be too late.
>
> So far there is no extra argument, the entire analysis is based on
> examining the proposed name argument.
Since we currently keep this special treatment limited to a small
number of buffer names, I'm not sure there's a need to expose this
facility to Lisp.
> > Buffer names starting with spaces are already special in some contexts,
> > so extending that idea for inhibiting buffer hooks doesn't sound too
> > bad,
>
> Eli thinks that "this is too drastic a measure".
Yes. No one said buffer hooks must _never_ run for temporary buffers.
There could be legitimate Lisp programs which want those hooks to run
in that case.
- bug#34765: 26.1; with-temp-buffer should not run buffer-list-update-hook, Basil L. Contovounesios, 2019/05/20
- bug#34765: 26.1; with-temp-buffer should not run buffer-list-update-hook, martin rudalics, 2019/05/21
- bug#34765: 26.1; with-temp-buffer should not run buffer-list-update-hook, Basil L. Contovounesios, 2019/05/21
- bug#34765: 26.1; with-temp-buffer should not run buffer-list-update-hook, martin rudalics, 2019/05/21
- bug#34765: 26.1; with-temp-buffer should not run buffer-list-update-hook,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- bug#34765: 26.1; with-temp-buffer should not run buffer-list-update-hook, martin rudalics, 2019/05/22
- bug#34765: 26.1; with-temp-buffer should not run buffer-list-update-hook, Eli Zaretskii, 2019/05/22
- bug#34765: 26.1; with-temp-buffer should not run buffer-list-update-hook, martin rudalics, 2019/05/23
- bug#34765: 26.1; with-temp-buffer should not run buffer-list-update-hook, Eli Zaretskii, 2019/05/23
- bug#34765: 26.1; with-temp-buffer should not run buffer-list-update-hook, martin rudalics, 2019/05/24
- bug#34765: 26.1; with-temp-buffer should not run buffer-list-update-hook, Stefan Monnier, 2019/05/22
- bug#34765: 26.1; with-temp-buffer should not run buffer-list-update-hook, Eli Zaretskii, 2019/05/22
- bug#34765: 26.1; with-temp-buffer should not run buffer-list-update-hook, Eli Zaretskii, 2019/05/22