Re: Feature request: new function start-remote-process

[Michael Albinus <michael.albinus@gmx.de>]

Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:

> In order not to derogate(?) to the custom of objecting late, I'll add an
> objection right now: the name is wrong because it indicates for what you use
> the feature rather than what it does.  I think that the name should include
> "file" somewhere rather than (or at least additionally to) "remote", since
> the key aspect compared to start-process is that it's a file-name operation.
> So I'd call it "start-file-process".  Other than that, I fully support this
> feature, of course.

"start-remote-process" was proposed by Richard 2 years ago, see
<http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2005-05/msg00769.html>.
He did also propose a new parameter, but I believe the file name
handler check based on default-directory is sufficient.

But I don't believe that the key aspect of "start-remote-process" is a
file-name operation. That is true for process-file only. There one
could have a remote file name specified in INFILE or BUFFER, and
PROGRAM would use a local copy of the file(s) if default-directory is
located on another host. PROGRAM could also run on a remote host if
default-directory is a remote file name.

In start-process as well as in "start-remote-process", you cannot pass
a file name as argument to PROGRAM. Consequently, "start-remote-process"
is not a file-name operation as process-file. Only the possibility to
run PROGRAM on another host is similar to what process-file offers.

Anyway, it is not important to me which name is chosen.

>         Stefan

Best regards, Michael.