bug#48042: 26.3; Macros don't work with french-postfix input method

[Gregory Heytings]

> If you search the Lisp files for unread-command-events,

Of course I did this.

> you will see how many features unrelated to input methods do add stuff 
> to unread-command-events.  What if an input method were active while one 
> of those unrelated features does that?

As I just said to Stefan, we could perhaps wait for an actual bug report 
to see whether this happens?  I tried to fix this bug, it still seems to 
me that what I proposed is TRT because it fixes the problem at its "root", 
but I cannot fix yet unknown bugs.

> That part didn't exist because once upon a time we recorded everything 
> immediately as it happened.  When that changed (for a good reason, as 
> described in the discussion cited by the commit log message), we needed 
> to keep track of what was and what wasn't recorded.  So restoring the 
> behavior back to what it was then doesn't help me to gain confidence in 
> the correctness of the patch, sorry.  Going back to what we had there is 
> certainly not something we should do.

We're not going back to what we had earlier, the patch goes back to what 
we had only when an input method is activated.

> Hmm... but the from_macro label seems to indicate that this code runs 
> for macros as well, even when input method is not active?

And in that case, given that the condition checks whether an input method 
is active, the event will be recorded.

> So you are saying we should bind the variable there as well?

I don't know, and didn't test that.  As I said above, it seems to me that 
fixing a bug at its "root" is much better than trying to add code 
elsewhere to circumvent the bug.

> Thanks.

What do you expect me to do now?