GNU bug report logs - #76538
31.0.50; 31.0.50; 31.0.50; feature/igc: using magit-section-cycle-global (S-TAB) and magit-section-toggle (TAB) in some random ways blocks GNU Emacs.

Previous Next

Package: emacs;

Reported by: João Moreira <joaomoreira <at> gmx.se>

Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2025 03:42:01 UTC

Severity: normal

Found in version 31.0.50

Full log


View this message in rfc822 format

From: Gerd Möllmann <gerd.moellmann <at> gmail.com>
To: Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
Cc: pipcet <at> protonmail.com, eller.helmut <at> gmail.com, Ihor Radchenko <yantar92 <at> posteo.net>, joaomoreira <at> gmx.se, 76538 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Subject: bug#76538: 31.0.50; 31.0.50; 31.0.50; feature/igc: using magit-section-cycle-global (S-TAB) and magit-section-toggle (TAB) in some random ways blocks GNU Emacs.
Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2025 08:17:45 +0100
Gerd Möllmann <gerd.moellmann <at> gmail.com> writes:

> Gerd Möllmann <gerd.moellmann <at> gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Gerd Möllmann <gerd.moellmann <at> gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> In any case, I think I would try to change DO_MARKERS to start at the
>>> end of the marker vector. If fix_marker_vector runs often enough one
>>> could also "straighten" the free-list there, maybe.
>>
>> Or one could build a doubly-linked list of markers in most-recently
>> created order. But that would mean 3 array slots per marker in the
>> marker vector. Don't know.
>
> Which would be something like the attached. Can someone try this with
> the original recipe? (It's a quick sketch, and blah blah.)

And I think I'll keep that. It makes an overall nicer implementation of
DO_MARKERS, keeps add and remove O(1), and provides iteration in
most-recently added order, which should be the same as without igc.

I like it :-). Until something better comes along, of course.




This bug report was last modified 203 days ago.

Previous Next


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