From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
Subject: Re: Single process output reading
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 00:49:58 -0400
Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Message-ID: <E1By1Li-00039Y-3i@fencepost.gnu.org>
References: <874qn35tgf.fsf@zamazal.org> <E1BxFLX-0003Sp-Tl@fencepost.gnu.org>
	<m3fz6jjqz2.fsf@kfs-l.imdomain.dk>
Reply-To: rms@gnu.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org
X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1092977432 19758 80.91.224.253 (20 Aug 2004 04:50:32 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 04:50:32 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: pdm@brailcom.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org
Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Aug 20 06:50:27 2004
Return-path: <emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165])
	by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
	id 1By1MB-0003Gc-00
	for <ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org>; Fri, 20 Aug 2004 06:50:27 +0200
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33)
	id 1By1QT-0000wl-Ic
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 20 Aug 2004 00:54:53 -0400
Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33)
	id 1By1QH-0000ui-HL
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 20 Aug 2004 00:54:41 -0400
Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33)
	id 1By1QG-0000u3-6O
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 20 Aug 2004 00:54:40 -0400
Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1By1QG-0000tm-1T
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 20 Aug 2004 00:54:40 -0400
Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1By1Li-0002pH-Fu
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 20 Aug 2004 00:49:58 -0400
Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.34)
	id 1By1Li-00039Y-3i; Fri, 20 Aug 2004 00:49:58 -0400
Original-To: storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm)
In-reply-to: <m3fz6jjqz2.fsf@kfs-l.imdomain.dk> (storm@cua.dk)
X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." <emacs-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/emacs-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:26337
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:26337

    Should I rename wait_reading_process_input to wait_reading_process_output ?

Indeed, it would be better to make the code consistent in regard
to whether we call this "input" or "output" ;-).