From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Partly deferred font-locking? Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2023 17:11:53 +0200 Message-ID: <834jsvbxdy.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87bkn52dso.fsf@web.de> <834jsxm0c7.fsf@gnu.org> <871qo03omi.fsf@web.de> <83zgaolu7o.fsf@gnu.org> <87o7r3gajc.fsf@web.de> <83cz7jc1d6.fsf@gnu.org> <87ilhbg8dw.fsf@web.de> <83a62nc03x.fsf@gnu.org> <87r0vz96d6.fsf@localhost> <87o7r3965z.fsf@localhost> <837cxrbz1r.fsf@gnu.org> <87ilhb95j8.fsf@localhost> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="5754"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: michael_heerdegen@web.de, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Ihor Radchenko Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Jan 12 16:34:31 2023 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1pFzb4-00016Q-Qk for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 12 Jan 2023 16:34:31 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pFzFH-0001tK-9o; Thu, 12 Jan 2023 10:11:59 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pFzFF-0001si-7L for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 12 Jan 2023 10:11:57 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pFzFE-0000pJ-RP; Thu, 12 Jan 2023 10:11:56 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=wo5hFUI2hOqAOEffwz8m6REF8841BNRPDv4zgpBhx5Q=; b=IOcaA68k6EoE AN7ocPQzN7ImWXT/FK4ckfNQbjkqpy3c5oUc+7tSp07kP1Jh6VjBsOkdY2zw3Nq9OJ1zML7CxscqV 5REevYdDX5sNQJOhQvy3ogYBb/cYZ34jXAJzw/M+RzU06RtIwJ6rJAQqylWnkWgFpwajJX+UQDiat x5cJJSboYQBOKo/O0mvxEklgaK3gFl91E85uIFoD8/p3JAKdrco96oNDzpM4DaGN8r78Nub1SCJEV /LaXUoQVOsq5c5JYc3Df2T7vifd2hJ/kcvkBWhlB2U/DIafCpgq3Dw0yOM7XJuagKqeLMRUk1IFLL D6fSasFmcaVY5qnWHApXGQ==; Original-Received: from [87.69.77.57] (helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pFzFE-0007JE-8T; Thu, 12 Jan 2023 10:11:56 -0500 In-Reply-To: <87ilhb95j8.fsf@localhost> (message from Ihor Radchenko on Thu, 12 Jan 2023 14:44:11 +0000) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:302384 Archived-At: > From: Ihor Radchenko > Cc: michael_heerdegen@web.de, emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2023 14:44:11 +0000 > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > >> I just tried > >> > >> (while-no-input (let ((x 0)) (while t (cl-incf x) (when (> 3 (random 1000000)) (message "%d" x))))) > >> > >> and it does not block. > > > > Do you understand why? Specifically: which code in Emacs caused us to > > throw on input in this case? And is that going to happen when Emacs > > calls a C function that hits the disk? > > AFAIU, maybe_quit throws the necessary signal as needed. > > For external C functions that interact with disk, they will indeed not > produce the signal. However, the signal will likely be thrown soon after > disk interaction ends. In my experience, helm command that opens a > number of files is successfully interrupted after populating a file > buffer but before initializing the major mode. My point is that when you call an expensive calculation inside while-no-input, you are entirely at the mercy of the code run by the body of while-no-input, wrt how soon after a keypress will while-no-input be interrupted. And since Michael was asking precisely about such situations, I commented that it _might_ make Emacs less responsive.