From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: last try (was: while-no-input) Date: 03 Nov 2002 02:04:40 +0100 Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <5xvg3flazb.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk> 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> <200210251344.g9PDi3W20508@rum.cs.yale.edu> <200210291945.g9TJjlU18481@rum.cs.yale.edu> <200210311803.g9VI3hM30498@rum.cs.yale.edu> <200211020407.gA2472v07516@rum.cs.yale.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1036282815 20187 80.91.224.249 (3 Nov 2002 00:20:15 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 00:20:15 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Richard Stallman , 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 1888Uu-0005FI-00 for ; Sun, 03 Nov 2002 01:20:12 +0100 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 1888bh-0003kF-00 for ; Sun, 03 Nov 2002 01:27:13 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 1888UM-0000Wp-00; Sat, 02 Nov 2002 19:19:38 -0500 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 1888G0-00085K-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 02 Nov 2002 19:04:48 -0500 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 1888Fx-00084Z-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 02 Nov 2002 19:04:46 -0500 Original-Received: from mail.filanet.dk ([195.215.206.179]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 1888Fw-000800-00; Sat, 02 Nov 2002 19:04:44 -0500 Original-Received: from kfs2.cua.dk.cua.dk (unknown [10.1.82.3]) by mail.filanet.dk (Postfix) with SMTP id 8AD357C017; Sun, 3 Nov 2002 00:04:41 +0000 (GMT) Original-To: "Stefan Monnier" In-Reply-To: <200211020407.gA2472v07516@rum.cs.yale.edu> Original-Lines: 38 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3.50 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:9075 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:9075 "Stefan Monnier" writes: > > C-g is pretty much like an error even if not exactly. > > Quitting is not an anomaly, but it is not normal. > > The arrival of more input is normal. > > Not while you're inside `while-no-input'. In the cases where I want > to use it, the arrival of user input is definitely not normal: > the code within while-no-input should normally run to completion > before the user hits a key. > And the code run inside `while-no-input' (typically tramp or ange-ftp) > usually has no idea that it might be interrupted by some keyboard input, > so such an occurrence is (for the running code) definitely not normal. Exactly!! > > > Please don't ask me to spend more time on this. > > I have lots of other work to do, and I've made the decision. > > But this decision is just wrong. I agree with Stefan. Richard, if you don't want to spend time thinking more about this, please leave the decision to Stefan who has spend a lot of time on this, and IMO has the right approach here. > PS: Kim, if you want this feature, you're probably better off > doing the remaining work, because I'm fed up with this arguing. I really think we need while-no-input, but while I can understand Stefan's approach, I simply don't understand what Richard wants to be done here, so I'm not the right person to ask to do that. -- Kim F. Storm http://www.cua.dk