From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: hw Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: User interaction from multiple threads Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2018 21:34:28 +0200 Organization: my virtual residence Message-ID: <87efeqgpq3.fsf@himinbjorg.adminart.net> References: <838t59j821.fsf@gnu.org> <87lg92q7ih.fsf@runbox.com> <83a7phdl7r.fsf@gnu.org> <61492e7f622303d02405bedbe65fabae@webmail.orcon.net.nz> <83pnybdaer.fsf@gnu.org> <837ekicw7i.fsf@gnu.org> <877ekiierh.fsf@himinbjorg.adminart.net> <83sh36b91z.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1534976219 8599 195.159.176.226 (22 Aug 2018 22:16:59 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2018 22:16:59 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) Cc: psainty@orcon.net.nz, gazally@runbox.com, rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel-bounces+psainty=orcon.net.nz@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Aug 23 00:16:54 2018 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 1fsbQr-00027E-Ep for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 23 Aug 2018 00:16:53 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:32785 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fsbSw-00050U-6k for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 22 Aug 2018 18:19:02 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:59803) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fsbSe-0004xb-8T for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Aug 2018 18:18:46 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fsbSd-0007eN-Is for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Aug 2018 18:18:44 -0400 Original-Received: from mo6-p01-ob.smtp.rzone.de ([2a01:238:20a:202:5301::9]:37000) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fsbSZ-0007cV-U0; Wed, 22 Aug 2018 18:18:40 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1534976318; s=strato-dkim-0002; d=adminart.net; h=Sender:References:Message-ID:Date:In-Reply-To:Subject:Cc:To:From: X-RZG-CLASS-ID:X-RZG-AUTH:From:Subject:Sender; bh=Hcmu4cCUGgG5HZRTECA2gydFAHaYPXH9+25M8D8YIWI=; b=XNPrwSao4D8MlWWkLdjClQBlIJKjIzOh9eU3jUOdWjK5U2qiziBpi8v4uLnQn8nitX dD+A4ybQIyhiHOoEqCe0FIjVHkChkhaLQqpvHaX+OnUhCatSSukz8PHvQzdPnxRM5YwE wotYOpPsCplOXwKWWBUPdQd3oSEpu7iF8NwRSfLB57wYHG95YnvVQLZuMTNsSdvNF3Nr q4nPuR0j+Njv2jrS2p9bCdIfObXU1ADu5Q3HBMEcHNFkaRB60U1m6M9iqJBt10Nw5VdN yv/jtYRxx8rm3LGYgGU+Sh1kBKS1kxAEqGfg0yIZQSLvhTERdSKPWFm9jOYsjc+VdY9h StHA== X-RZG-AUTH: ":O2kGeEG7b/pS1FS4THaxjVF9w0vVgfQ9xGcjwO5WMRo5c+h5ceMqQWZ3yrBp+AVdIIwXjneEe9k=" X-RZG-CLASS-ID: mo00 Original-Received: from lee by himinbjorg.adminart.net with local (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1fsbSP-0000ll-NP; Thu, 23 Aug 2018 00:18:29 +0200 In-Reply-To: <83sh36b91z.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Wed, 22 Aug 2018 20:33:28 +0300") X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2a01:238:20a:202:5301::9 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:228833 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> From: hw >> Cc: rms@gnu.org, psainty@orcon.net.nz, gazally@runbox.com, emacs-deve= l-bounces+psainty=3Dorcon.net.nz@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org >> Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2018 17:48:18 +0200 >>=20 >> what other choice is there than queueing up the RFIs and leaving it to >> the users to work their way through the queue as they see fit? > > We all kinda agree about that, the question is how to do that in > practice with as little disruption of existing code as possible. ok >> >From a useability point of view, it doesn=C2=B4t make any sense that Em= acs >> grinds to a halt during restoring a session when restoring it creates an >> RFI and tries to force me to deal with it. > > But that's exactly what happens today with a single thread. So it's > an unrelated issue. It means that the issue is already there, regardless.