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: Mon, 14 Apr 2008 23:02:31 +0200 Message-ID: <4803C667.6090105@gmail.com> References: <4800D965.9080202@gmail.com> <480208C8.3030401@gnu.org> <480212F7.7090409@gmail.com> <4802249D.2060909@gmail.com> <480271D2.7040304@gmail.com> <4802FD64.1080602@gmail.com> <48038487.3060201@gmail.com> <4803B6A5.4030201@gnu.org> <4803C09F.5000200@gmail.com> <4803C2C7.1050208@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 1208207017 12177 80.91.229.12 (14 Apr 2008 21:03:37 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2008 21:03:37 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Juanma Barranquero , Eli Zaretskii , Stefan Monnier , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Jason Rumney Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Apr 14 23:03:45 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 1JlVpu-0000dv-Jv for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 14 Apr 2008 23:03:34 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JlVpG-00075h-BH for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 14 Apr 2008 17:02:54 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JlVpB-00072B-5V for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 14 Apr 2008 17:02:49 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JlVp8-0006v4-C9 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 14 Apr 2008 17:02:48 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JlVp7-0006ul-Ve for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 14 Apr 2008 17:02:46 -0400 Original-Received: from ch-smtp02.sth.basefarm.net ([80.76.149.213]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JlVoz-0008Hp-D0; Mon, 14 Apr 2008 17:02:37 -0400 Original-Received: from c83-254-150-27.bredband.comhem.se ([83.254.150.27]:61861 helo=[127.0.0.1]) by ch-smtp02.sth.basefarm.net with esmtp (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1JlVox-0000HV-8E; Mon, 14 Apr 2008 23:02:35 +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: <4803C2C7.1050208@gnu.org> X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 080414-1, 2008-04-14), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Originating-IP: 83.254.150.27 X-ACL-Warn: Too high rate of unknown addresses received from you X-Scan-Result: No virus found in message 1JlVox-0000HV-8E. X-Scan-Signature: ch-smtp02.sth.basefarm.net 1JlVox-0000HV-8E 1689b2bd2393c3064ab0e85002512e3c 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:95215 Archived-At: Jason Rumney wrote: > Lennart Borgman (gmail) wrote: >> I do not understand what you mean here. Does the lisp thread look for >> new messages when it is looping? (I think it should.) > It reads the message queue at the normal points where normal keyboard > input is read (not Ctrl-G, that is handled specially). You have to call > specific functions in your lisp loop to arrange for it to happen inside > your loop. You might do that if you expect your loop to take a long > time, but probably not if it is an infinite loop because of a bug. Is it necessary to call those specific functions? Can't we use the same mechanism that is used for Ctrl-G when WM_CLOSE is recieved? (After a timeout of course.) >> If it does not then we can't do any useful after a SendMessage with >> timeout either, or can we? > > If we used SendMessage, then the system would detect that we aren't > responding to that message after its timeout. I see. That is a benefit, but that does not help very much if the goal is to give the user a chance to save data (or bring Emacs back to a useable state).