From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Abrahamsen Subject: Re: probable caching bug? Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2013 08:58:34 +0700 Message-ID: <877gbhtoad.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> References: <87pppcys45.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <87a9gfuwns.fsf@gmail.com> <874n6mbuyb.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <8761r2uhcy.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35427) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Vp78n-0004AO-Cx for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 06 Dec 2013 20:57:15 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Vp78e-0008Uq-Rm for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 06 Dec 2013 20:57:09 -0500 Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:38026) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Vp78e-0008TG-Ke for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 06 Dec 2013 20:57:00 -0500 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Vp78c-0002Jy-E5 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 07 Dec 2013 02:56:58 +0100 Received: from 223.204.248.136 ([223.204.248.136]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 07 Dec 2013 02:56:58 +0100 Received: from eric by 223.204.248.136 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 07 Dec 2013 02:56:58 +0100 List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Nicolas Goaziou writes: > Hello, > > Eric Abrahamsen writes: > >> Yes, it's up to date -- after I sent this message I started wondering >> if it had been a while since I updated, so I pulled and reloaded, and >> not long after that saw the bug again. > > Well, too bad. > >> I expect to see this again, so I can run the function above, but will >> reporting the results be of any use to you? If I know which element is >> corrupted, what should I be reporting back? > > The corrupted element is only interesting when there's a pattern (e.g. > only lists and items are corrupted). Another important information is > the action triggering the corruption. The function helps to find it out. Ah, so you use it in after-change-functions?