From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Juanma Barranquero" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs does not listen on w32 Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2008 03:43:45 +0200 Message-ID: References: <4800D965.9080202@gmail.com> <480208C8.3030401@gnu.org> <480212F7.7090409@gmail.com> <4802249D.2060909@gmail.com> <480271D2.7040304@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1208137439 4978 80.91.229.12 (14 Apr 2008 01:43:59 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2008 01:43:59 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Eli Zaretskii , jasonr@gnu.org, "Lennart Borgman \(gmail\)" , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Stefan Monnier" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Apr 14 03:44:36 2008 connect(): Connection refused Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JlDkI-0005PT-1O for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 14 Apr 2008 03:44:34 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JlDjd-00027V-Ne for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 13 Apr 2008 21:43:53 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JlDja-000272-15 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 13 Apr 2008 21:43:50 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JlDjX-000261-HY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 13 Apr 2008 21:43:48 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JlDjX-00025y-CO for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 13 Apr 2008 21:43:47 -0400 Original-Received: from wa-out-1112.google.com ([209.85.146.178]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JlDjW-0002HT-SG for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 13 Apr 2008 21:43:47 -0400 Original-Received: by wa-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id k34so1767529wah.10 for ; Sun, 13 Apr 2008 18:43:45 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=8YjlDFeWlPncKHun3xtFcOapeIkjczMC9CkhA4AoT9E=; b=DwnIMmTEBN/tpxVnA9JdeCjrZdwHdWOXn3wHjlOfxrEn0/jHDT2UfvkAKo+nZKXFQHSWxoTONBu23nkKywg3R9stloUwTF6v6FlL3NTq2Imu9eRqmc2PSQ0iK/SYLIrd2wv3ztxzQcQKYgsU9xfizhqo+tlwrer1XGqQjNKzECA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=YPM7d3dN21fhCLmJfo1V7bQEqFeXWszNCnJfZ5sTJWfQeZ1pXpR3fsfcI2r67ddb19244Sa2EgV8QBTHlSSQUD6CAeAGofxVCa5X3kwvj9XJpBoDiT81bZrriNsCeimPvbcnZSlgwJMf8VYnQxg389HxS9TMvUF4bosATYrzYBU= Original-Received: by 10.114.191.1 with SMTP id o1mr6232173waf.66.1208137425808; Sun, 13 Apr 2008 18:43:45 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.115.72.13 with HTTP; Sun, 13 Apr 2008 18:43:45 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Content-Disposition: inline X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) 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: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:95149 Archived-At: On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 3:38 AM, Juanma Barranquero wrote: > > You wouldn't: when the WM_CLOSE message is put into the queue, the > > currently running Elisp code would additionally be interrupted > > "unconditionally" by setting the quit-flag. > > Yes, that's what I think Lennart was suggesting. Well, on second thought, no, not really. Lennart was suggesting that Emacs would *always* be terminated. So after receiving WM_CLOSE, the current elisp code would be interrupted, normal code associated with exiting Emacs would be run (kill-emacs-hook, etc.), and that code would *also* be terminated, in circumstances that Lennart has not yet fully explained (presumably, with some sort of timer), if necessary. Juanma