From xemacs-m  Wed Sep 10 13:42:34 1997
Received: from jagor.srce.hr (hniksic@jagor.srce.hr [161.53.2.130])
	by xemacs.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA24339
	for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Wed, 10 Sep 1997 13:42:16 -0500 (CDT)
Received: (from hniksic@localhost)
	by jagor.srce.hr (8.8.7/8.8.6) id UAA19908;
	Wed, 10 Sep 1997 20:42:12 +0200 (MET DST)
To: XEmacs Developers <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>
Subject: Re: free speed-up
References: <199709101832.OAA03108@rattlesnake>
X-Attribution: Hrvoje
X-Face: Mie8:rOV<\c/~z{s.X4A{!?vY7{drJ([U]0O=W/<W*SMo/Mv:58:*_y~ki>xDi&N7XG
        KV^$k0m3Oe/)'e%3=$PCR&3ITUXH,cK>]bci&<qQ>Ff%x_>1`T(+M2Gg/fgndU%k*ft
        [(7._6e0n-V%|%'[c|q:;}td$#INd+;?!-V=c8Pqf}3J
From: Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic@srce.hr>
Date: 10 Sep 1997 20:42:11 +0200
In-Reply-To: David Bakhash's message of "Wed, 10 Sep 1997 14:32:51 -0400"
Message-ID: <kigoh61qad8.fsf@jagor.srce.hr>
Lines: 16
X-Mailer: Gnus v5.4.65/XEmacs 20.3(beta19) - "Kyiv"

David Bakhash <cadet@mit.edu> writes:

> in lisp/prim/subr.el I was using the macro
> `with-string-as-buffer-contents' and noticed that it does an
> `erase-buffer' before and after it handles its forms.  The one
> before is absolutely essential, but the one that takes place as it
> exists is absolutely unecessary.

I disagree.  BODY can fill the tempbuf with lots of junk.  Since undo
is not recorded in tempbuf, erasing it is wise in terms of memory
usage.

-- 
Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic@srce.hr> | Student at FER Zagreb, Croatia
--------------------------------+--------------------------------
I'm sure they'll listen to reason! -- Neal Stevenson, _Snow Crash_

