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

Alex Bennée

Reply via email to