Re: baby step toward thread patch

[Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>]

>>>>> "Tom" == Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com> writes:

Tom> I'd like to solve the latter problem by putting some needed
Tom> infrastructure directly on trunk.  Once all the infrastructure bits
Tom> are merged, development can focus on just the threading bits.

Tom> I'm posting this to get an ok on this change before checking it in.  In
Tom> the absence of comments (after a decent interval) I will just go ahead
Tom> with it.

It has been a couple of weeks without comment.

So, I have committed the latest version of all my changes.  This is a
bit different than what I sent two weeks ago, but not drastically so.

If it causes problems, please let me know, and I will see what I can do
to fix them.

I separated out each logical change.  However, the very last change
consists of a hand-generated patch combined with a quite large
automatically-generated patch.  I could not separate these without
breaking the build.

If anybody is interested, I can send the final version of the rewriting
script.

Tom> One last thing is that this patch doesn't handle buffer_defaults
Tom> properly yet.  That is not hard; I just think it should be an
Tom> independent change.

This remains true.  Updating buffer_defaults will be my next patch.  It
may be a while before I get to this, as my Emacs hacking time is
extremely limited.

After buffer defaults I will tackle per-buffer and per-keyboard
bindings.  For these, I will require some assistance, as the source
rewriter for this patch requires compiling Emacs, and I don't have
access to all platforms.

I think that will be all the needed infrastructure bits; then we can
look into rebasing the concurrency branch (or, more likely, making a new
branch).

Tom