Re: pending-undo-list - should it not be buffer local?

[Lennart Borgman (gmail)]

Andreas Schwab wrote:
> "Lennart Borgman (gmail)" <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > Thanks, but why should it not be permanent buffer local then?
>
> Why should it?


The reason I am asking is that I thought that there might be a chance 
that a kill-all-local-variables caused caused by the undo command might 
erase it. I am not at all sure that this is the case, but I am currently 
testing and at least with that change (permanent buffer local) I can not 
currently see the problems I saw before.

Can you see any way it can be erased by kill-all-local-variables before 
it should?

And my original question: Can you see any problems with making this 
variable permanent buffer local? (And are there perhaps other variables 
involved in undo that should also be permanent buffer local?)