Subject: Re: [External] : bug#75626: 31.0.50; Dired misses or double-processes files when auto-revert-mode is enabled

From: Tassilo Horn <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2025 07:13:48 +0100

Drew Adams <[email-masked]> writes:

> Still not following this thread.  But if the plan
> is to make `dired-map-over-marks' prevent things
> such as reverting, then a priori I'm not in favor
> of that.  A priori, I think that macro should
> implement no such control, and make _few or no
> assumptions_ about the context in which it's used
> or the purposes to which it might be put to use.
> Such control is not its role.
>
> If some particular _use_ of the macro should
> provide some such control, e.g., should not let
> XYZ happen, then fix that function instead (even
> if that might mean not using the macro there).
>
> The macro itself should stay general & unassuming.

The plan is to change dired-buffer-stale-p so that it returns nil when
inhibit-read-only is bound to a non-nil value which is the case during
the execution of the code generated by dired-map-over-marks and might
catch other cases, too.  The macro itself stays as-is.

Bye,
Tassilo