Re: Making while interruptable

[Lennart Borgman <lennart.borgman@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 1:58 AM, Miles Bader<miles@gnu.org> wrote:
> Lennart Borgman <lennart.borgman@gmail.com> writes:
>> However this mechanism would just be used only for code that you are
>> running in a timer - in cases where the code does not explicitly
>> handle pending input. Of course, changing that code is better, but you
>> can not always do that.
>
> Nonetheless, the cure seems far worse than the disease.

I am just trying to be modern. Modern so called scientific medicin
prefers this type of cure. It is good for the economy and therefore by
definition good.

Sigh. Or maybe I have just got too much bad influences (reading to
much incredibly bad peer reviewed medical articles with good
reputation). Or perhaps I am just looking for an excuse that is not
worse than those I have seen in other places. At least I did not hurt
anyone with my suggestion.

Ok. You convinced me that this is not the road forward.

> People writing
> timers need to be very careful.  If there are important functions timers
> need to call which should be extended to handle user input differently,
> then fix those functions, or file a bug, or whatever.  [An implicit
> mechanism like you suggest might seem "easier" but it would most likely
> not actually work correctly in many cases.]
>
> -Miles
>
> --
> Electricity, n. The cause of all natural phenomena not known to be caused by
> something else.
>