GNU bug report logs - #75834
[PATCH] Add missing custom :set to savehist-autosave-interval

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Ship Mints <shipmints <at> gmail.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 75834 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#75834: [PATCH] Add missing custom :set to savehist-autosave-interval
Date: Sat, 1 Feb 2025 08:35:09 -0500

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

On Sat, Feb 1, 2025 at 8:28 AM Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> wrote:

> >
> >  Why do you think an idle timer would be better?
> >
> > I prefer idle timers for this kind of thing as I find auto saving while
> I'm working to be distracting, and
> > occasionally slows me down at least on my slow computer, and barely
> noticeable on my fast one. As not
> > everyone has super fast modern equipment, I'm guessing we prefer to be
> respectful of older setups. I have
> > three autosave timers set up in my configuration, and even one is
> distracting enough.
> >
> > The timer I put in save-place is an idle timer, and now is a good time
> to debate idle vs. absolute timers for
> > these.
>
> A disadvantage of idle timers is that they can miss changes.  This
> might be more significant for the save-place case, since by the time
> Emacs is idle, the file you visited might no longer be visited in any
> buffer.
>

Changes to the save-place-alist in memory are not lost unless there is an
Emacs crash or an abnormal Emacs shutdown. Same
for savehist-minibuffer-history-variables which are accumulated in memory
until persisted.

It's the interval to persist the save-place-alist that we're talking about.
I think using an idle timer in both saveplace and savehist will not cause a
real-world issue. If people are truly concerned about persisting they
should set a very short timer and idleness occurs frequently, in practice.

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Previous Next

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