From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [RFC] Gnus generalized search, part II Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2017 12:42:07 +0300 Message-ID: <83bmrjpksw.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87zif930mt.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <87tw5hjnzr.fsf@hanan> <87mvb92er2.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <83efwkrhj1.fsf@gnu.org> <87inlw32ga.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <8337d0qxno.fsf@gnu.org> <87shl01bzb.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <86wpa9wwr2.fsf@stephe-leake.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1493199809 28837 195.159.176.226 (26 Apr 2017 09:43:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2017 09:43:29 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stephen Leake Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Apr 26 11:43:24 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1d3JTl-0007M6-T4 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 26 Apr 2017 11:43:22 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:53897 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d3JTr-0006Pl-PV for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 26 Apr 2017 05:43:27 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41413) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d3JTF-0006PT-MP for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 26 Apr 2017 05:42:50 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d3JTC-0002mX-8W for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 26 Apr 2017 05:42:49 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:52165) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d3JTC-0002mN-4t; Wed, 26 Apr 2017 05:42:46 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:3530 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1d3JTB-0001QQ-Gt; Wed, 26 Apr 2017 05:42:45 -0400 In-reply-to: <86wpa9wwr2.fsf@stephe-leake.org> (message from Stephen Leake on Mon, 24 Apr 2017 12:17:37 -0500) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:214300 Archived-At: > From: Stephen Leake > Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2017 12:17:37 -0500 > > > Basically we're sending search queries to multiple > > servers, and using threads to make the external processes asynchronous. > > C-g would come into play when one or more of those processes hangs or is > > slow, and the user loses patience and wants to quit. The desired result > > would be that whichever thread we're currently waiting on gets killed, > > There should never be _one_ thread that you are waiting on (except when > there is only one left, of course); you should always be waiting for > _any_ thread to respond. Who is "you" in this context that is waiting? And what is meant by "respond"? > Otherwise, you don't have a truly asynchronous system; you have a > polled synchronous system. Emacs Lisp threads are indeed not a truly asynchronous system, and cannot be used to produce any such system, because only one Lisp thread can be running at any given time. > So the user would be saying "kill all outstanding threads". The application could catch C-g and kill threads. But the question was what should C-g do without any application code, and the answer cannot be kill all Lisp threads, because only one thread could ever receive the C-g keystroke and act on it. So maybe there's some mismatch of expectations here.