From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Use specific functions to create shell processes Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 17:35:21 +0300 Message-ID: <83lgzkex1y.fsf@gnu.org> References: Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1472135761 13503 195.159.176.226 (25 Aug 2016 14:36:01 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 14:36:01 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Tino Calancha Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Aug 25 16:35:53 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bcvkz-0002UI-S7 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 25 Aug 2016 16:35:49 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56616 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bcvku-0002Yl-AB for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 25 Aug 2016 10:35:44 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:60020) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bcvkJ-0002WV-JL for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 25 Aug 2016 10:35:08 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bcvkF-00010o-Fx for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 25 Aug 2016 10:35:06 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:38597) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bcvkF-00010H-Ci; Thu, 25 Aug 2016 10:35:03 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:4370 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1bcvkD-00087b-KG; Thu, 25 Aug 2016 10:35:02 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from Tino Calancha on Thu, 25 Aug 2016 15:52:03 +0900 (JST)) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:206798 Archived-At: > From: Tino Calancha > Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 15:52:03 +0900 (JST) > Cc: tino.calancha@gmail.com > > we have in subr.el, specific funtions to create processes > when the program is a shell, e.g., call-process-shell-command. > Using these funtions when appropiate, i.e., when the program > is a shell, results in a more readable code. > I have noticed that not all the code in the Emacs tree use these > functions. > > I propose a patch to replace calls to general functions creating > processes with the shell specific ones, when the program is a shell. > > ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; > >From c036272adeb7268c0d496e40d6cd4410e9ecac7d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Tino Calancha > Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 15:45:46 +0900 > Subject: [PATCH] Use specific functions to create shell processes > > subr.el define specific functions to create processes when > the program is a shell. Replace calls to the general > functions creating processes with calls to > the shell specific if the program is a shell. > (lisp/calc/calc-graph.el, lisp/gnus/gnus-art.el) > (lisp/gnus/gnus-dired.el, lisp/gnus/gnus-fun.el) > (lisp/gnus/gnus-sum.el, lisp/gnus/gnus-uu.el) > (lisp/gnus/mail-source.el, lisp/gnus/mm-decode.el) > (lisp/ibuf-ext.el, lisp/image-dired.el) > (lisp/mail/mailalias.el, lisp/man.el) > (lisp/mh-e/mh-print.el, lisp/net/network-stream.el) > (lisp/org/ob-eval.el, lisp/progmodes/ada-xref.el) > (lisp/progmodes/compile.el, lisp/progmodes/gdb-mi.el) > (lisp/progmodes/verilog-mode.el, lisp/simple.el) > (lisp/vc/diff.el): > Use 'process-file-shell-command', 'call-process-shell-command', > 'start-process-shell-command', and 'start-file-process-shell-command' > instead of 'process-file', 'call-process', 'start-process' > and 'start-file-process' if the program is a shell. Thanks for working on this. Like I said in the past, I'd like us to have a test for each functionality whose implementation we are refactoring. Can we do that in this case?