procyberian/emacs
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

(report_overlay_modification): Fix bug#65929

Browse source 
Somehow the new overlay code in Emacs-29 changed slightly
the test to decide when to run the `modification-hooks` of overlays,
with the consequence that these hook functions end up being executed
also when text is deleted right after an empty overlay, which is
contrary to Emacs-28 behavior as well as contrary to the Texinfo doc.

* src/buffer.c (report_overlay_modification): Better reproduce the
Emacs-28 code.

* test/src/buffer-tests.el (overlay-modification-hooks):
Add corresponding test.
This commit is contained in:
Stefan Monnier 2023-09-13 18:49:55 -04:00
parent 6cc6455e93
commit 0065621d0d
2 changed files with 2 additions and 1 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

2
src/buffer.c
View file

@ -4091,7 +4091,7 @@ report_overlay_modification (Lisp_Object start, Lisp_Object end, bool after,
} }
/* Test for intersecting intervals. This does the right thing /* Test for intersecting intervals. This does the right thing
for both insertion and deletion. */ for both insertion and deletion. */
if (! insertion || (end_arg > obegin && begin_arg < oend)) if (end_arg > obegin && begin_arg < oend)
{ {
Lisp_Object prop = Foverlay_get (overlay, Qmodification_hooks); Lisp_Object prop = Foverlay_get (overlay, Qmodification_hooks);
if (!NILP (prop)) if (!NILP (prop))

1
test/src/buffer-tests.el
View file

@ -142,6 +142,7 @@ properties."
(expected-calls . ((modification-hooks (nil 3 4)) (expected-calls . ((modification-hooks (nil 3 4))
(modification-hooks (t 3 4 1))))) (modification-hooks (t 3 4 1)))))
((replace . "4")) ((replace . "4"))
((replace . "4") (overlay-beg . 4)) ;bug#65929
((replace . "12") ((replace . "12")
(expected-calls . ((modification-hooks (nil 1 3)) (expected-calls . ((modification-hooks (nil 1 3))
(modification-hooks (t 1 2 2))))) (modification-hooks (t 1 2 2)))))