GNU bug report logs - #73637
[PATCH] New hook 'help-setup-hook'

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: help-debbugs <at> gnu.org (GNU bug Tracking System)
To: Dmitry Gutov <dmitry <at> gutov.dev>
Cc: tracker <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#73637: closed ([PATCH] New hook 'help-setup-hook')
Date: Sun, 06 Oct 2024 01:35:02 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Your message dated Sun, 6 Oct 2024 04:34:38 +0300
with message-id <53fb6ab2-e733-4c3d-af33-4bd7814090e9 <at> gutov.dev>
and subject line Re: bug#73637: [PATCH] New hook 'help-setup-hook'
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #73637,
regarding [PATCH] New hook 'help-setup-hook'
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
help-debbugs <at> gnu.org.)


-- 
73637: https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=73637
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs <at> gnu.org with problems

[Message part 2 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: Eshel Yaron <me <at> eshelyaron.com>
To: bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
Subject: [PATCH] New hook 'help-setup-hook'
Date: Sat, 05 Oct 2024 09:14:54 +0200

[Message part 3 (text/plain, inline)]

Tags: patch

Add a new hook that allows commands that make use of bespoke variable
settings in the *Help* buffer to clean up after themselves.  This
generalizes and improves the accuracy of the hard-coded clean up that
help-setup-xref currently performs.

[0001-New-hook-help-setup-hook.patch (text/patch, attachment)]

[Message part 5 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: Dmitry Gutov <dmitry <at> gutov.dev>
To: Eshel Yaron <me <at> eshelyaron.com>, Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>, 73637-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#73637: [PATCH] New hook 'help-setup-hook'
Date: Sun, 6 Oct 2024 04:34:38 +0300

On 05/10/2024 16:32, Eshel Yaron wrote:
> Dmitry Gutov<dmitry <at> gutov.dev> writes:
> 
>> Have you tried going in the other direction? Meaning, killing all locals
>> by default but keeping the ones that are really needed.
>>
>> This is less backward compatible, but ultimately a more predictable and
>> common design. This seems to work okay here:
> Stefan Monnier writes:
> 
>> Looking at the patch from a distance it makes me wonder whether we
>> shouldn't call `kill-all-local-variables` instead?
>> IOW instead of listing all the vars that need to be killed, change to
>> code to preserve the few vars that should not be killed.
> SGTM, that works too and it's definitely a simpler approach.

Great! I've pushed that patch, please report any new regressions.

Previous Next

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