From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Alex =?UTF-8?Q?Benn=C3=A9e?= <alex.bennee@linaro.org>
Subject: =?UTF-8?B?YnVnIzIzOTE3OiAgYnVnIzIzOTE3OiBQbGVhc2UgY29uc2lkZXIg?=
 =?UTF-8?B?bWFraW5nIEJ1ZyAjMjM5MTcgYSBibG9ja2VyIGZvciAyNS4xICh3YXMgUmU6?=
 =?UTF-8?B?IG9yZy1jYXB0dXJlOiBDYXB0dXJlIHRlbXBsYXRlIOKAmGfigJk6IE1hdGNo?=
 =?UTF-8?B?IGRhdGEgY2xvYmJlcmVkIGJ5IGJ1ZmZlciBtb2RpZmljYXRpb24gaG9va3Mp?=
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2016 18:05:37 +0100
Message-ID: <87a8hdmuce.fsf__28184.0598014698$1468948348$gmane$org@linaro.org>
References: <87vb066ejv.fsf@linaro.org> <8360s67qcp.fsf@gnu.org>
	<87bn1yyaui.fsf@linaro.org>
	<CAM-tV-9Befm+jtvvO9tZsYwCbzgggumNgWeuPzV-i=ZB0mgPog@mail.gmail.com>
	<87mvlhmv0x.fsf_-_@moondust.awandering> <837fcl5zs9.fsf@gnu.org>
	<m28tx1o6h6.fsf@newartisans.com> <87a8hgkwcb.fsf@linaro.org>
	<8360s42mcb.fsf@gnu.org> <87eg6rgmlg.fsf@gmail.com>
	<83lh0y24y6.fsf@gnu.org>
	<jwvmvle5udz.fsf-monnier+emacsbugs@gnu.org> <83eg6q1hbo.fsf@gnu.org>
	<jwv1t2q5jsz.fsf-monnier+emacsbugs@gnu.org> <83a8hd1vzi.fsf@gnu.org>
	<jwvzipdeibv.fsf-monnier+emacsbugs@gnu.org> <834m7l1u8u.fsf@gnu.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Return-path: <emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49059)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1bPYTC-0003UU-Dc
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 19 Jul 2016 13:06:11 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1bPYTA-0005hT-Dt
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 19 Jul 2016 13:06:09 -0400
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.23917.B23917.146894794522035@debbugs.gnu.org>
In-reply-to: <834m7l1u8u.fsf@gnu.org>
List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." <emacs-orgmode.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode/>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: "Emacs-orgmode"
	<emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Cc: 23917@debbugs.gnu.org, rpluim@gmail.com, jwiegley@gmail.com, Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>, nljlistbox2@gmail.com


Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>> From: Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>
>> Cc: rpluim@gmail.com,  23917@debbugs.gnu.org,  alex.bennee@linaro.org,  jwiegley@gmail.com,  nljlistbox2@gmail.com
>> Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2016 12:03:51 -0400
>>
>> I guess the next best thing is:
>> - copy search_regs.start and search_regs.end before calling replace_range.
>> - use that copy when adjusting the match data.
>> Or equivalently, use save-match-data.  IOW go back to your original patch.
>> Duh!
>
> Do we care that using save-match-data in every call to replace-match
> might mean a performance hit?  If it will, then this will again punish
> most of the users for the benefit of those few who (1) have
> buffer-modification hooks, and (2) those hooks call save-match-data.

I care unless there is an easy way to identify which buffer modification
hooks are responsible so I can take steps as a user to mitigate the
problems.

--
Alex Bennée