bug#35418: [PATCH] Don't poll auto-revert files that use notification

["Mattias Engdegård" <mattiase@acm.org>]

29 apr. 2019 kl. 18.23 skrev Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>:
> 
>> There is a section called Reverting, which starts about `revert-buffer' but then goes on to talk about the auto-revert, global-auto-revert and auto-revert-tail modes and details about the mechanisms behind them: polling, intervals, notification.
>> 
>> Then there is a (sibling) section called Autorevert, which despite its name only talks about auto-reverting non-file buffers.
> 
> You say "section" but the names you cite are node names, not section
> names.  The latter are slightly more descriptive.

Correct, thank you. (The node names attract the eyes since they are highlighted as links.)

>> This can be reorganised in various ways. We could move all autorevert text to a sibling node to Reverting, or to one or more child nodes. In any case, such text shuffling should not be part of this patch.
> 
> I think we should have sibling sections "Reverting" and "Autorevert",
> with the latter describing both types of auto-reverting.  And
> "Reverting" should have a cross-reference to "Autorevert" for
> automatic reverting of file-visiting buffers.
> 
> Would you like to submit a patch to that effect?

I'll see what I can do, once we are done with this particular patch.

>>> Saying this, the user option might need another name. What about
>>> `auto-revert-also-poll'?
>> 
>> Naming is always hard. I started with `auto-revert-avoid-polling' but wanted to avoid a negative name.
>> I tried `auto-revert-also-poll' but it somehow didn't feel right; not all buffers use notification.
>> It is nothing I feel strongly about, so if you do prefer that name I'll change, but I've kept the original name in the patch for now.
> 
> I actually think auto-revert-dont-poll is better, even though it's
> negative.

Then I'd prefer auto-revert-avoid-polling; 'don't poll' sounds definitive but we may still have to poll from time to time.