emacs-bug-tracker
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[debbugs-tracker] bug#37584: closed ([PATCH] Quadruple term-buffer-maxim


From: GNU bug Tracking System
Subject: [debbugs-tracker] bug#37584: closed ([PATCH] Quadruple term-buffer-maximum-size)
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2019 10:21:02 +0000

Your message dated Mon, 7 Oct 2019 12:19:39 +0200
with message-id <CADwFkmnEHNp5VUOCo=address@hidden>
and subject line Re: bug#37584: [PATCH] Quadruple term-buffer-maximum-size
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #37584,
regarding [PATCH] Quadruple term-buffer-maximum-size
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
address@hidden.)


-- 
37584: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=37584
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact address@hidden with problems
--- Begin Message --- Subject: [PATCH] Quadruple term-buffer-maximum-size Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2019 15:52:33 +0200
term-buffer-maximum-size has been 2048 since 1997:

commit ce0ba762d737cd36b20513cd6d9540643524c581
Author: Richard M. Stallman <address@hidden>
Date:   Wed Apr 2 03:46:39 1997 +0000

I think we have more memory nowadays, and a more reasonable default
would probably be 8192.

Any objections to doing this?

Best regards,
Stefan Kangas

Attachment: 0001-Quadruple-term-buffer-maximum-size.patch
Description: Binary data


--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- Subject: Re: bug#37584: [PATCH] Quadruple term-buffer-maximum-size Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2019 12:19:39 +0200
Lars Ingebrigtsen <address@hidden> writes:

> > I think we have more memory nowadays, and a more reasonable default
> > would probably be 8192.
>
> Makes sense to me.

Thanks, pushed to master as commit 130b1321ed.

Best regards,
Stefan Kangas


--- End Message ---

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]