Eli Zaretskii <e...@gnu.org> writes: >> From: Stefan Monnier <monn...@iro.umontreal.ca> >> Cc: rpl...@gmail.com, 23...@debbugs.gnu.org, alex.ben...@linaro.org, >> jwieg...@gmail.com, nljlistb...@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
