From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Lennart Borgman (gmail)" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs does not listen on w32 Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2008 16:04:39 +0200 Message-ID: <480212F7.7090409@gmail.com> References: <4800D965.9080202@gmail.com> <480208C8.3030401@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1208095563 15647 80.91.229.12 (13 Apr 2008 14:06:03 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2008 14:06:03 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Stefan Monnier , Emacs Devel To: Jason Rumney Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Apr 13 16:06:10 2008 connect(): Connection refused Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Jl2pv-0005XV-T8 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 13 Apr 2008 16:05:51 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Jl2pH-000482-U8 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 13 Apr 2008 10:04:59 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Jl2pE-00044s-6d for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 13 Apr 2008 10:04:56 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Jl2pC-000418-G2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 13 Apr 2008 10:04:55 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Jl2pC-00040v-Cx for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 13 Apr 2008 10:04:54 -0400 Original-Received: from ch-smtp01.sth.basefarm.net ([80.76.149.212]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Jl2p8-0000Z5-AK; Sun, 13 Apr 2008 10:04:50 -0400 Original-Received: from c83-254-150-27.bredband.comhem.se ([83.254.150.27]:62299 helo=[127.0.0.1]) by ch-smtp01.sth.basefarm.net with esmtp (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1Jl2p6-0004Ez-4Q; Sun, 13 Apr 2008 16:04:48 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.9) Gecko/20071031 Thunderbird/2.0.0.9 Mnenhy/0.7.5.666 In-Reply-To: <480208C8.3030401@gnu.org> X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 080413-0, 2008-04-13), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Originating-IP: 83.254.150.27 X-Scan-Result: No virus found in message 1Jl2p6-0004Ez-4Q. X-Scan-Signature: ch-smtp01.sth.basefarm.net 1Jl2p6-0004Ez-4Q 8b22fe90b9041d562e2bb7f70925ae7b X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6? (barebone, rare!) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:95102 Archived-At: Jason Rumney wrote: > Lennart Borgman (gmail) wrote: >> It looks to me there must be two bugs here: >> >> - Emacs not giving up cpu to windows. > > Since Windows NT 3.1 and 95, multitasking has been pre-emptive > (controlled by the OS), not co-operative (controlled by applications). > If Windows does not allow you to use other programs when Emacs is busy, > that is a problem with Windows, not with Emacs. Emacs should not have to > "give up CPU", that is an osolete concept from the co-operative > multitasking days. Yes, Stefan and you are right here of course. My bad, I did not express my self very good. Stefan replied that it could be a problem with memory consumption instead since this can be hard for the OS to cope with. Another possibility is perhaps that the message queue is blocked. >> - Emacs is not listening to OS events when it executes lisp code. > > You are trying to cleanly kill Emacs. That involves running Lisp code, > so the lisp interpreter needs to finish the infinite loop you told it to > execute before it gets to cleaning up and exiting. The usual workaround > in such a case is to terminate Emacs uncleanly. I would expect that the message sent to the Emacs when clicking on the upper left [X] would terminate any loop, just like C-g terminates a loop in a command.