From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Single process output reading Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 21:34:35 -0400 Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <874qn35tgf.fsf@zamazal.org> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1092792901 25400 80.91.224.253 (18 Aug 2004 01:35:01 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 01:35:01 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Aug 18 03:34:57 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1BxFLs-0006l6-00 for ; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 03:34:57 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BxFQ4-0004Ul-56 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 21:39:16 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1BxFPn-0004Pm-DT for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 21:38:59 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1BxFPl-0004Oj-PZ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 21:38:57 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BxFPl-0004Oe-14 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 21:38:57 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1BxFLY-0007lE-Oa for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 21:34:36 -0400 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.34) id 1BxFLX-0003Sp-Tl; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 21:34:35 -0400 Original-To: Milan Zamazal In-reply-to: <874qn35tgf.fsf@zamazal.org> (message from Milan Zamazal on Mon, 16 Aug 2004 11:21:36 +0200) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 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 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:26293 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:26293 IMO a better way would be to allow restricting accept-process-output to just a single process output reading. Then the speech output system, aware of possible consequences of advising 'message' etc., could invoke accept-process-output in the restricted form, without the danger of unwanted side effects. I think it would be reasonable to provide a way to tell wait_reading_process_output to ignore certain processes and read from certain other processes. I worry about the idea of not running timers, though, and that seems unnecessary for what you need. I think it would be better to implement the feature so that timers do run. I think it would be better to clean up the calling conventions of wait_reading_process_output rather than try to squeeze everything into the existing argumemts.