[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#60333: [PATCH] whitespace: Update bob, eob markers in base and indir
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
bug#60333: [PATCH] whitespace: Update bob, eob markers in base and indirect buffers |
Date: |
Thu, 12 Jan 2023 11:33:15 +0200 |
> Cc: 60333@debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2022 03:11:11 -0500
> From: Richard Hansen <rhansen@rhansen.org>
>
> On 12/28/22 09:44, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> >>> "Expose" is the wrong term, because we don't have that info ready to
> >>> be exposed. We'd either have to create&maintain that list, or compute
> >>> it on-demand when requested.
> > [...]
> >> 1. Maintain internal indirect buffer list associated with buffers in C
> >
> > That's the "create&maintain that list" option.
> > Personally I don't like it: I'd like to reduce the amount of support we
> > provide in C for indirect buffers rather than increase it.
>
> What alternative would you prefer?
>
> How about something like this in a shared location (e.g., simple.el next
> to `clone-indirect-buffer'):
>
> (defvar indirect-buffers--cached nil)
>
> (defun indirect-buffers--invalidate-cache ()
> (setq indirect-buffers--cached nil)
> (remove-hook 'buffer-list-update-hook
> #'indirect-buffers--invalidate-cache))
>
> (defun indirect-buffers ()
> (unless indirect-buffers--cached
> (setq indirect-buffers--cached '(nil nil))
> (dolist (buf (buffer-list))
> (let ((base (buffer-base-buffer buf)))
> (when base
> (push buf (plist-get indirect-buffers--cached base)))))
> (add-hook 'buffer-list-update-hook
> #'indirect-buffers--invalidate-cache))
> indirect-buffers--cached)
>
> Other options I can see:
>
> #1: Apply this patch as-is, keep Org as-is, and live with the code
> duplication.
> #2: Reject this patch and keep Org as-is.
> #3: Advise `make-indirect-buffer'. The advice would record new
> indirect buffers and add a `kill-buffer-hook' function to clean up the
> entry. (Note, however, that `make-indirect-buffer' is a primitive
> function.)
> #4: Fix Bug#46982. (One possible approach that maintains backwards
> compatibility: Teach `after-change-functions' to look for a symbol
> property that means "run me not just for changes made in this buffer,
> but also if a change is made in this buffer's base/indirect buffer".)
And this.