GNU bug report logs - #71370
30.0.50; Please un-obsolete buffer-substring as a generalized variable

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Stefan Kangas <stefankangas <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 71370 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, yantar92 <at> posteo.net, michael_heerdegen <at> web.de, monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca, adam <at> alphapapa.net, acorallo <at> gnu.org, spwhitton <at> spwhitton.name
Subject: bug#71370: 30.0.50; Please un-obsolete buffer-substring as a generalized variable
Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2025 14:53:24 +0200

> Cc: 71370 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Ihor Radchenko <yantar92 <at> posteo.net>,
>  Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>, Adam Porter <adam <at> alphapapa.net>,
>  Andrea Corallo <acorallo <at> gnu.org>, Sean Whitton <spwhitton <at> spwhitton.name>
> From: Stefan Kangas <stefankangas <at> gmail.com>
> Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2025 12:48:26 +0000
> 
> Stefan Kangas <stefankangas <at> gmail.com> writes:
> 
> > Michael Heerdegen <michael_heerdegen <at> web.de> writes:
> >
> >> Stefan Kangas <stefankangas <at> gmail.com> writes:
> >>
> >>> If not, I think what Sean writes above is the way to go.
> >>
> >> What about what I said and Sean agreed to?  Did you read my replies?
> >
> > Yes, if you mean this part:
> >
> >         Please let's keep those two separate questions separate: (1) is a
> >         certain functionality useful, and (2) if it is, should it be provided,
> >         maybe even only, as a gv setter function.
> >
> > As for `buffer-substring`, if we can't have a function that provides
> > that functionality (the proposed `replace-region`), then (setf
> > (buffer-substring ...) ...) is clearly _not_ obsolete and shouldn't be
> > marked as such.
> >
> > As for `buffer-string`, I don't know any proposed replacement function,
> > so I think it's not obsolete on these grounds too.  FWIW, I don't see a
> > huge need for a replacement function, and I think a generalized variable
> > is perfectly serviceable in that case.
> 
> It seems like we can't find agreement on a way forward for adding
> `replace-region` in Bug#76313, or even on which functions to obsolete
> or how.

That is not a necessary condition for making buffer-substring a
generalized variable.  We could have an internal function, maybe not
even exposed to Lisp, to replace the buffer substring.  That will not
solve the more general replace-region dispute, but no one said we must
always kill all the birds in one blow.

Previous Next

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