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: block_input for some APIs Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2016 05:46:47 +0200 Message-ID: <83r35cbie0.fsf@gnu.org> References: <831sxdc9hs.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1481600788 23721 195.159.176.226 (13 Dec 2016 03:46:28 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2016 03:46:28 +0000 (UTC) Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Daniel Colascione Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Dec 13 04:46:24 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 1cGe2n-00056O-Tr for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 13 Dec 2016 04:46:22 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:35153 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cGe2s-0001fE-6r for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 12 Dec 2016 22:46:26 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39589) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cGe2e-0001Zp-B4 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Dec 2016 22:46:13 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cGe2b-0007Wj-B5 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Dec 2016 22:46:12 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:38796) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cGe2b-0007Wb-8R; Mon, 12 Dec 2016 22:46:09 -0500 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:1541 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1cGe2a-00078j-8W; Mon, 12 Dec 2016 22:46:08 -0500 In-reply-to: (message from Daniel Colascione on Mon, 12 Dec 2016 13:53:33 -0800) 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:210395 Archived-At: > From: Daniel Colascione > Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2016 13:53:33 -0800 > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > > That said, the existing calls to block_input don't do a lot of harm, so > there's no need to remove them. They make the code trickier to read and understand, because block_input, unblock_input, and input_blocked_p are not thread-safe. It took me a while to convince myself they are not an issue with the current concurrency design, except in xgselect.c, and I'm still not sure my conclusion is 100% valid.