GNU bug report logs - #21195
25.0.50; Let MARKER arg to `set-marker' be a number

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 21195 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 21195 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
To: bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
Subject: 25.0.50; Let MARKER arg to `set-marker' be a number
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2015 10:40:21 -0700 (PDT)

Minor enhancement request.  Let `set-marker' (aka `move-marker') accept
a buffer position that is just a number as its first arg.  IOW, give
`set-marker' this behavior:

(defun new-set-marker (num-or-marker position &optional buffer)
  "..."
  (unless (markerp num-or-marker)
    (setq num-or-marker  (with-current-buffer buffer
                           (copy-marker num-or-marker))))
  (set-marker num-or-marker position buffer))


In GNU Emacs 25.0.50.1 (i686-pc-mingw32)
 of 2015-07-03 on LEG570
Bzr revision: 2b848fadd51e805b2f46da64c5958ea7f009048a
Windowing system distributor `Microsoft Corp.', version 6.1.7601
Configured using:
 `configure --host=i686-pc-mingw32 --enable-checking=yes,glyphs'

Message #8 received at 21195 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>
To: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
Cc: 21195 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#21195: 25.0.50; Let MARKER arg to `set-marker' be a number
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2016 23:42:53 +0200

Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com> writes:

> Minor enhancement request.  Let `set-marker' (aka `move-marker') accept
> a buffer position that is just a number as its first arg.  IOW, give
> `set-marker' this behavior:
>
> (defun new-set-marker (num-or-marker position &optional buffer)
>   "..."
>   (unless (markerp num-or-marker)
>     (setq num-or-marker  (with-current-buffer buffer
>                            (copy-marker num-or-marker))))
>   (set-marker num-or-marker position buffer))

Hm...  Well, I don't really see the point.  `set-marker' is so
conceptually clean.  And saying `(set-marker (make-marker) ...)' is so
easy.  Closing.

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no

Message #15 received at 21195 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
To: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>
Cc: 21195 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: RE: bug#21195: 25.0.50; Let MARKER arg to `set-marker' be a number
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2016 17:05:08 -0800 (GMT-08:00)

> > Minor enhancement request.  Let `set-marker' (aka `move-marker') accept
> > a buffer position that is just a number as its first arg.  IOW, give
> > `set-marker' this behavior:
> >
> > (defun new-set-marker (num-or-marker position &optional buffer)
> >   "..."
> >   (unless (markerp num-or-marker)
> >     (setq num-or-marker  (with-current-buffer buffer
> >                            (copy-marker num-or-marker))))
> >   (set-marker num-or-marker position buffer))
> 
> Hm...  Well, I don't really see the point.  `set-marker' is so
> conceptually clean.  And saying `(set-marker (make-marker) ...)' is so
> easy.  Closing.

Well, I said it was minor.  Consider funcalling, applying, or
mapping over positions, which can be markers.

Sure, you can use an anonymous function that does just what
you need (test with markerp, copy-marker if not a marker)...
But why shouldn't `set-marker' do this?  It's trivial and
costs only a call to `markerp' for doing what `set-marker'
does now.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.