Re: unexpected behaviour of `with-output-to-string'

jpw> Maybe he was toying with reusing the same string-output jpw> buffer, but that would have insane effects whenever a jpw> `with-output-to-string' call occured within another. Or maybe he actually did, it did, and somebody applied a quick fix without comment in the Lisp file. Ah, yes: 2000-03-02 SL Baur <steve(a)beopen.com&gt; * subr.el (with-string-as-buffer-contents): Reimplement using `with-temp-buffer'. Fixes non-unique buffer name problem, fixes non-deletion of buffer after execution problem. (with-output-to-string): Use unique buffer name. Good grief, Steve. :-P jpw> Placing BODY outside the `with-current-buffer' seems correct jpw> as well as neat, but I wonder whether any callers jpw> accidentally use `insert' instead of `princ' and haven't been jpw> bitten yet. TeX people (David Kastrup/preview-latex and whoever does reftex.el) seem to like the idiom (with-output-to-string (with-current-buffer standard-output ...)) which should work right. The other callers all seem to have it right. poe.el defmacro-maybes with-output-to-string. :-b -- Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences http://turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp University of Tsukuba Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN My nostalgia for Icon makes me forget about any of the bad things. I don't have much nostalgia for Perl, so its faults I remember. Scott Gilbert c.l.py