From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Stefan Monnier" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: comint read-only prompt Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 11:28:27 -0400 Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <200208211528.g7LFSRQ24758@rum.cs.yale.edu> References: <200208191540.g7JFemV13663@rum.cs.yale.edu> <1029772679.16562.13.camel@turtle.as.arizona.edu> <200208201721.g7KHLcb09801@wijiji.santafe.edu> <1029866584.20782.76.camel@turtle.as.arizona.edu> <20020820211702.GB28081@gnu.org> <1029880892.20785.233.camel@turtle.as.arizona.edu> <20020821001812.GA23832@gnu.org> <1029893073.20783.290.camel@turtle.as.arizona.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1029943917 16681 127.0.0.1 (21 Aug 2002 15:31:57 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 15:31:57 +0000 (UTC) Cc: JD Smith , rms@gnu.org, monnier+gnu/emacs@rum.cs.yale.edu, simon.marshall@misys.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17hXSe-0004Kw-00 for ; Wed, 21 Aug 2002 17:31:56 +0200 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 17hXv5-0006aG-00 for ; Wed, 21 Aug 2002 18:01:20 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 17hXTk-00056C-00; Wed, 21 Aug 2002 11:33:04 -0400 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 17hXPs-0004Um-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 21 Aug 2002 11:29:04 -0400 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 17hXPM-0004KD-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 21 Aug 2002 11:29:03 -0400 Original-Received: from rum.cs.yale.edu ([128.36.229.169]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 17hXPK-0004Ib-00; Wed, 21 Aug 2002 11:28:30 -0400 Original-Received: (from monnier@localhost) by rum.cs.yale.edu (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g7LFSRQ24758; Wed, 21 Aug 2002 11:28:27 -0400 X-Mailer: exmh version 2.4 06/23/2000 with nmh-1.0.4 Original-To: Miles Bader Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:6732 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:6732 > > A proposed solution: if snapshot were moved to the beginning of the > > output-filter, these problems would disappear. > > That would be completely wrong. The reason why `prompt snapshotting' > is done when the user sends input is because that's the only time you > can be pretty sure that what the overlay covers is _actually_ a prompt. I think what he was suggesting is: - comint-send-string sets the overlay's `snapshot' property. - comint's output filter checks the `snapshot' property to determine whether to call comint-snapshot-last-prompt or to just move the overlay. But it seems that it's much simpler to just use process-send-string. Maybe comint-send-string's docstring could be a bit more forthcoming about what it means by "extra bookkeeping" so that authors can make a better informed choice between the two functions. Stefan