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: while-no-input Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 09:44:03 -0400 Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <200210251344.g9PDi3W20508@rum.cs.yale.edu> References: <200210012119.g91LJW922045@rum.cs.yale.edu> <200210022143.g92LhXQ28321@rum.cs.yale.edu> <200210031553.g93FrwH31218@rum.cs.yale.edu> <200210041559.g94Fx9006880@rum.cs.yale.edu> <5xr8egzom4.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk> <200210240720.g9O7KxV11421@rum.cs.yale.edu> <5xelagp218.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035553704 18455 80.91.224.249 (25 Oct 2002 13:48:24 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 13:48:24 +0000 (UTC) Cc: storm@cua.dk, monnier+gnu/emacs@rum.cs.yale.edu, 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 1854p4-0004nN-00 for ; Fri, 25 Oct 2002 15:48:22 +0200 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 1854rk-0004BE-00 for ; Fri, 25 Oct 2002 15:51:08 +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 1854mM-0003gm-00; Fri, 25 Oct 2002 09:45:34 -0400 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 1854kz-000110-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 25 Oct 2002 09:44:09 -0400 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 1854kv-0000ln-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 25 Oct 2002 09:44:08 -0400 Original-Received: from rum.cs.yale.edu ([128.36.229.169]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 1854ku-0000ij-00; Fri, 25 Oct 2002 09:44:04 -0400 Original-Received: (from monnier@localhost) by rum.cs.yale.edu (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g9PDi3W20508; Fri, 25 Oct 2002 09:44:03 -0400 X-Mailer: exmh version 2.4 06/23/2000 with nmh-1.0.4 Original-To: Richard Stallman 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:8789 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:8789 > IIRC, RMS said that using signal like that was very unclean and using > throw would be cleaner. > > That is the first thing I said. Afterwards I agreed to a modified > version of the change which avoids the ugliness at the Lisp level. I don't understand what you're referring to. Are you saying that you did agree to a version that was not using `throw' ? What ugliness at the Lisp level ? I still have no idea what you mean by "ugly" in reference to my patch. All it does is allow you to make normal keystrokes generate a quit event and it also allows you to check which kind of quit event is generated so you can tell the difference between a C-g quit and an any-key quit. Using throw for such any-key quit sounds just plain wrong to me since it is very much a `quit' like any other, that obeys inhibit-quit and that aborts the current execution. As I said, I'd probably settle for `throw' because I care more about having the feature at all than about implementing it right (from my point of view), but if I have to settle for `throw', it'll take me much more time to get the patch ready/tested/installed, so someone else might want to do it before me. Stefan