From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ken Raeburn Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: advice needed for multi-threading patch Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2009 23:57:20 -0400 Message-ID: <05769780-1AB5-446C-AA8B-65549DB0E39C@raeburn.org> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v936) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1254196670 2105 80.91.229.12 (29 Sep 2009 03:57:50 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 03:57:50 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Tom Tromey , Emacs development discussions To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Sep 29 05:57:43 2009 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 1MsTqQ-0006T4-Fa for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 05:57:42 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:32869 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MsTqP-0000hz-KS for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 28 Sep 2009 23:57:41 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MsTqJ-0000gr-SF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 28 Sep 2009 23:57:35 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MsTqE-0000gf-FN for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 28 Sep 2009 23:57:34 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=54474 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MsTqE-0000gc-AL for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 28 Sep 2009 23:57:30 -0400 Original-Received: from splat.raeburn.org ([69.25.196.39]:52181 helo=raeburn.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MsTq6-0006hc-AD for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 28 Sep 2009 23:57:30 -0400 Original-Received: from [10.0.0.172] (squish.raeburn.org [10.0.0.172]) by raeburn.org (8.14.3/8.14.1) with ESMTP id n8T3vKCI022662; Mon, 28 Sep 2009 23:57:21 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.936) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. 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:115771 Archived-At: On Sep 28, 2009, at 23:20, Stefan Monnier wrote: > I think you're thinking of the case where accept-process-output is > called without specifying any particular process to wait for, whereas > I was thinking of the case where accept-process-output is called with > a process argument. True. Well, more specifically, if the just-this-one flag is set, too, then my concern goes away. Just specifying the process doesn't mean that output from another process won't get, uh, processed, during a call. Given the single-threaded nature of elisp now, I doubt most uses are likely to set the flag. In fact a quick grep over the top- level lisp sources shows most calls there just specify the process and timeout. (Oh... hm, timers. Same issues, also probably unlikely to be a problem in most cases.) Ken