From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: The order input events are processed. Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2006 16:17:37 +0200 Message-ID: References: <87odtrrkgh.fsf@lrde.org> <87ejukt7fe.fsf@lrde.org> <87zmd7x3qk.fsf@lrde.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1157984377 29281 80.91.229.2 (11 Sep 2006 14:19:37 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2006 14:19:37 +0000 (UTC) Cc: michael.cadilhac@lrde.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Sep 11 16:19:34 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GMmdG-0007HV-FG for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 11 Sep 2006 16:19:30 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GMmdF-0002RF-T7 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 11 Sep 2006 10:19:29 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GMmcf-0002G3-18 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Sep 2006 10:18:53 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GMmcd-0002Fj-JN for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Sep 2006 10:18:52 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GMmcd-0002FY-CX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Sep 2006 10:18:51 -0400 Original-Received: from [195.41.46.235] (helo=pfepa.post.tele.dk) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1GMmdt-0000aL-7P; Mon, 11 Sep 2006 10:20:09 -0400 Original-Received: from kfs-l.imdomain.dk.cua.dk (unknown [80.165.4.124]) by pfepa.post.tele.dk (Postfix) with SMTP id 4B055FAC05B; Mon, 11 Sep 2006 16:18:42 +0200 (CEST) Original-To: rms@gnu.org In-Reply-To: (Richard Stallman's message of "Mon\, 11 Sep 2006 10\:12\:01 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) 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:59683 Archived-At: Richard Stallman writes: > It used unread-post-input-method-events instead of unread-command-events > to ensure that the event is pushed back on the first list of events > processed by read-event. > > That change is not right, I think. Using > unread-post-input-method-events instead of unread-command-events > alters the way the events are processed: it does goto reread_first > instead of goto reread_for_input_method. But since the event was returned by read-event, hasn't it been through the "for_input_method" code already? So passing through once more seems like a bug to me. But I don't quite understand this input method stuff, so I suppose you are right. > With your change (or my change), we know that these lists are > empty when read-event is called. That being so, I think it is fine > to put the event back in unread-command-events. Ok. -- Kim F. Storm http://www.cua.dk