From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?Q?K=C3=A9vin_Le_Gouguec?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Why does `read-multiple-choice' lock user into minbuffer? Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2020 09:43:01 +0200 Message-ID: <87o8pffqm2.fsf@gmail.com> References: <87r1ubfyq5.fsf@red-bean.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="51312"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: Emacs Development To: Karl Fogel Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Jun 19 09:43:39 2020 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 1jmBgY-000DEQ-9S for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 19 Jun 2020 09:43:38 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50282 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jmBgX-0008RZ-An for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 19 Jun 2020 03:43:37 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:43558) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jmBg3-00081O-4A for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 19 Jun 2020 03:43:07 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-wm1-x32f.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::32f]:33886) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jmBg1-0004vZ-Du for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 19 Jun 2020 03:43:06 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-wm1-x32f.google.com with SMTP id u26so8225898wmn.1 for ; Fri, 19 Jun 2020 00:43:05 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version; bh=noE2B8VsepNyTKJC2f26B4/hdq1zut99soc9AOK7o54=; b=RztaWSL+Wqrt+f5kqrRwhSRyDlem15j6tRMF4z3HoN16duB8aC1xOCXWjvfBqBFcJj QIqM4hEv13eRwBgMuEmGfbq40zVW1idAPYNNoN/ZxD2Kz5LzSPZrqC7lETliiFsPdDcB nCBLwZ7AAfbPuNG6A+X/CluhO76S4YFSpgGMAUCqsptCeueBUgNGh17C9Y1uCScECEea 1zY/COptrNJ3MiiHvVkWfXT2t/2DlvkynWXYjEihIKzaK3DMwRyD7Hpx5xXRVgBxSAjT p639hfdAFXwO9Ujjt6Y4UkHHdvqIk4mC0LFmRy2qU/BPVi10Pwoyvv8qOweqGNTb5Gqv TjGQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to :message-id:user-agent:mime-version; bh=noE2B8VsepNyTKJC2f26B4/hdq1zut99soc9AOK7o54=; b=j5SH1uPVkuUnW3Yx1vxZZTKYLdzcpYASDuOqMZpBTEtVVX9mr7ZQSfXOEB1LFGN0fu sIWx5JWaoCjA0dR2kq34QKbVyt80obGtaWd/kEF7Co0ZTHyFG2JHZPxn9tO+zHUCewhC scTHWK4BrzVAAF81lLzLpr8MXMS0SsboI7qOMdHouD7Y4V86A9J6SQofMNk2swQ+fIgf nqg4FlY6HDW/j1kKysbMpIs0VFZBfECDtoz8gm4V7HuL+n2xCwmU4ZDvrqnV6BzqhK4f 8G7+3G3ljHSWiXMQE6V+daF+yXFXIUshc3gRQADGf2rc68Qh5z37ckzI4QkWSYILq70B dfUw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531vPinnz1dD+h+mi9gjCGnUlhpmlqJBH3uv1VARCXJ2T9bwtS9c zQ2h9r/HlqST+yo8amDn7Ddy11J/Q+Eiew== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxKNK94m7Ym6unMGIDsHZBHyDlVPP+FB3hQ6rZ8w5F7LCKe5yGBNO2DgBMqyhpqrWd7nEzXpw== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:8107:: with SMTP id c7mr2380758wmd.20.1592552583333; Fri, 19 Jun 2020 00:43:03 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from my-little-tumbleweed (200.143.13.109.rev.sfr.net. [109.13.143.200]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d2sm6291136wrs.95.2020.06.19.00.43.01 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 19 Jun 2020 00:43:02 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87r1ubfyq5.fsf@red-bean.com> (Karl Fogel's message of "Thu, 18 Jun 2020 23:47:46 -0500") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::32f; envelope-from=kevin.legouguec@gmail.com; helo=mail-wm1-x32f.google.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: No matching host in p0f cache. That's all we know. X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=_AUTOLEARN X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:252335 Archived-At: Karl Fogel writes: > But I'd like to understand the more general question too: why does > `read-multiple-choice' lock the user into the minbuffer so strictly? IIUC (but maybe I'm wrong; I'm not entirely sure I understand all the nuances between the minibuffer and the echo-area), it's "just" an implementation detail: read-multiple-choice uses read-event, which does not use the minibuffer. So you're not actually "locked into the minibuffer" (if you were, keys such as C-x o would be available to you), it's just that read-multiple-choice traps you in a while-loop, calling read-event until you hit one of the keys you are prompted for. FWIW, back in December[1] Juri mentioned that read-multiple-choice should probably be patched to use the minibuffer. [1] https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=35564#184