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: usr1-signal, usr2-signal, etc. Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2006 10:48:17 +0100 Message-ID: References: <20061211.233142.146367996.mituharu@math.s.chiba-u.ac.jp> <20061212.223242.258196916.mituharu@math.s.chiba-u.ac.jp> <87slfddurm.fsf@stupidchicken.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1166522004 24752 80.91.229.2 (19 Dec 2006 09:53:24 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2006 09:53:24 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Chong Yidong , rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Dec 19 10:53:22 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 1Gwbez-0001bz-AT for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 19 Dec 2006 10:53:21 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Gwbey-0001ZN-KY for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 19 Dec 2006 04:53:20 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GwbaI-000890-Oe for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 19 Dec 2006 04:48:31 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GwbaH-00088C-AC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 19 Dec 2006 04:48:29 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GwbaG-00087x-F0 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 19 Dec 2006 04:48:28 -0500 Original-Received: from [195.41.46.237] (helo=pfepc.post.tele.dk) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1GwbaF-0003Zw-Mt; Tue, 19 Dec 2006 04:48:27 -0500 Original-Received: from kfs-l.imdomain.dk.cua.dk (unknown [80.165.4.124]) by pfepc.post.tele.dk (Postfix) with SMTP id 4A7FE8A0002; Tue, 19 Dec 2006 10:48:17 +0100 (CET) Original-To: YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu In-Reply-To: (YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu's message of "Tue\, 19 Dec 2006 11\:14\:06 +0900") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.91 (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:63949 Archived-At: YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu writes: >>>>>> On Mon, 18 Dec 2006 11:38:21 -0500, Chong Yidong said: > >> storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) writes: >>> So I would rather redefine them to single events (named sigusr1 and >>> sigusr2 as those names are already known to the signal-process >>> function), and handle them through special-event-map as you >>> suggested. > >> In that case, is there a rationale for the rather large changes >> checked into emacs.c, keyboard.c, and process.c over the last two >> weeks? Should they not be reverted? > > Do the "large changes" you think should be reverted include my > 2006-12-14 changes? These changes are not for the event format but > for fixing a problem that has existed for a long time. That is, about > calling a non-reentrant function in a signal handler context while it > is executed in a normal context. Yes. Those changes are very important on their own. It still think that handling signals through special-event-map is the proper (or the least problematic) thing to do. So unless I hear any objections, I'll make that change later this week. -- Kim F. Storm http://www.cua.dk