Re: with-output-to-temp-buffer [Re: reverting CJK input methods]

[Kim F. Storm]

David Kastrup <address@hidden> writes:

> Kenichi Handa <address@hidden> writes:

> > In addtion, to make a final decision, we must study how
> > erase-buffer is used in various codes, which consumes our
> > working time much and results in the delay of the next
> > release.  I think the sooner release is more important than
> > completely settling on what to do with this problem.
> 
> Can anyone think of any reason why erase-buffer should not remove the
> current buffer completely?  And no, I don't think that read-only
> properties on some entries in a buffer count as a reason:
> erase-buffer is basically a buffer-wide operation and should only be
> influenced by buffer-wide read-only-ness.
> 
> If you want to protect your buffer against erasure, set the whole
> buffer to read-only.  Or signal errors in before-change-functions,
> without actually doing the change.
> 
> That is easy enough to do, and much more reliable.

I agree.

-- 
Kim F. Storm <address@hidden> http://www.cua.dk