From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Caldwell Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#754: Can't cancel dabbrev-expand (M-/) with C-g Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2009 20:41:51 -0800 Message-ID: <4968270F.4000105@porkrind.org> References: <87abf61i99.fsf@cyd.mit.edu> <48ADC243.40104@porkrind.org> Reply-To: David Caldwell , 754@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1231563821 20798 80.91.229.12 (10 Jan 2009 05:03:41 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 05:03:41 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 754@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com To: Chong Yidong Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jan 10 06:04:51 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1LLW1j-0001qt-6Y for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 10 Jan 2009 06:04:51 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:42000 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LLW0S-0006Fz-JZ for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 10 Jan 2009 00:03:32 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LLW0P-0006Fh-BQ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Jan 2009 00:03:29 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LLW0N-0006FV-S8 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Jan 2009 00:03:29 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=34137 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LLW0N-0006FS-Lc for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Jan 2009 00:03:27 -0500 Original-Received: from rzlab.ucr.edu ([138.23.92.77]:44338) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LLW0M-0005rc-Vx for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Jan 2009 00:03:27 -0500 Original-Received: from rzlab.ucr.edu (rzlab.ucr.edu [127.0.0.1]) by rzlab.ucr.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8/Debian-3) with ESMTP id n0A53OQN027448; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 21:03:25 -0800 Original-Received: (from debbugs@localhost) by rzlab.ucr.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8/Submit) id n0A4o3UL023915; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 20:50:03 -0800 X-Loop: owner@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com Resent-From: David Caldwell Resent-To: bug-submit-list@donarmstrong.com Resent-CC: Emacs Bugs Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 04:50:03 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: owner@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com X-Emacs-PR-Message: followup 754 X-Emacs-PR-Package: emacs X-Emacs-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 754-submit@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com id=B754.123156252522525 (code B ref 754); Sat, 10 Jan 2009 04:50:03 +0000 Original-Received: (at 754) by emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com; 10 Jan 2009 04:42:05 +0000 X-Spam-Bayes: score:0.5 Bayes not run. spammytokens:Tokens not available. hammytokens:Tokens not available. Original-Received: from death.porkrind.org (cpe-76-87-215-142.socal.res.rr.com [76.87.215.142]) by rzlab.ucr.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8/Debian-3) with ESMTP id n0A4g2Bm022519 for <754@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com>; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 20:42:03 -0800 Received-SPF: pass (death.porkrind.org: authenticated connection) receiver=death.porkrind.org; client-ip=127.0.0.1; helo=black.local; envelope-from=david@porkrind.org; x-software=spfmilter 0.97 http://www.acme.com/software/spfmilter/ with libspf-unknown; Original-Received: from black.local (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by death.porkrind.org (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-5) with ESMTP id n0A4fqEl032663 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 9 Jan 2009 20:41:52 -0800 User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (Macintosh/20081209) In-Reply-To: <48ADC243.40104@porkrind.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7 Face: iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAADAAAAAwCAQAAAD9CzEMAAAACXBIWXMAAAsTAAALEwEAmpwY AAAABGdBTUEAALGOfPtRkwAAACBjSFJNAAB6JQAAgIMAAPn/AACA6QAAdTAAAOpgAAA6mAAAF2+S X8VGAAABiklEQVR42rRYSZIDIQwzLv7/ZXLoEAzeBKG7ag4DRhZeBKQ0Qr5imLWCrKwn0HImc1Mx aAvmmc/cuAT7RMYws6v/gHeb0p4/y5792GJJlLZWOPgsdV5NaRes4Xe4632sLljD7wKv1Ta74H/h MxecN1Rc2TatYcP7zb+6WFfN/zMSHg1Ymuxjrzd+DuLw6Nlekggt1hvr7KK9tRIX85jjM6GTYhfv nzXH3jBdYc4koueBs66M+Xv9O9n5ML4urWssjGeMY3if3bzGSvk30BQ46OOaxJjLCpzPJAzXrOrD z5VFh58TIiwESIiCHNxxwPTy97qDei8YdpVdyYEv6EQcK8n+iTyE/Cn1eoe7HwN+F56oErVSGtJY Q1sR2ehaUHfjvJuv0tL7qAzEbBmfF2IHrVi8zp9N0pZtQZZHOXp/sLW4+hqKvm3iccaPwP3XgnKX n8/YtVeOsnenRG7VCBFlZ5fe3LOyANCVdGAIwDs7tTXGF4hIk15/iAfSgv2UkNFItSszOG3Ha7r0 GQBerhBkHOAzmQAAAABJRU5ErkJggg== X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 00:03:29 -0500 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:23960 Archived-At: David Caldwell wrote: > Chong Yidong wrote: >>> If I have many buffers open (284 at the moment) and if I run >>> dabbrev-expand (M-/) to expand the word under my buffers then it >>> searches through every buffer and takes an understandably long >>> time. If I mispelled the word fragment then it never has a hope of >>> finding it and I'd like to cancel the operation. But C-g does not work >>> for some reason and so I have to wait a good 5 to 10 seconds for it to >>> finish scanning all my buffers. This gets very frustrating after the >>> third or fourth time. >> >> I don't see why C-g wouldn't work here. After further testing, I believe this is not really a bug in dabbrev. C-g *does* cancel the operation, it's just that sometimes there is a large lag before it cancels (though in my current tests I've never had it go beyond 2 seconds). I have a ton of buffers open right this moment and fulling scan them takes 15 to 20 seconds, so I can definitely tell that it's canceling. The 1 to 2 second lag is still a little frustrating, but it's much better than the originally reported 5 to 10 second lag. I wonder if it has to do with how the Mac handles the quit signal in windowed mode... -David