From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#35328: 27.0.50; Lisp reference, "Accepting Output": Should describe what happens to standard error Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2019 22:12:11 +0300 Message-ID: <83tver896c.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83k1fpb15c.fsf@gnu.org> Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="127370"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" Cc: 35328@debbugs.gnu.org To: Philipp Stephani Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Apr 21 21:13:14 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hIHtq-000X14-7J for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 21 Apr 2019 21:13:14 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56199 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hIHtp-0007uT-4L for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 21 Apr 2019 15:13:13 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:51525) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hIHti-0007uA-3d for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 21 Apr 2019 15:13:06 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hIHth-0005nw-7g for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 21 Apr 2019 15:13:06 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:35541) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hIHte-0005mH-CU for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 21 Apr 2019 15:13:03 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hIHte-0004X8-5V for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 21 Apr 2019 15:13:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2019 19:13:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 35328 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 35328-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B35328.155587397517414 (code B ref 35328); Sun, 21 Apr 2019 19:13:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 35328) by debbugs.gnu.org; 21 Apr 2019 19:12:55 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49085 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hIHtX-0004Wn-BH for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 21 Apr 2019 15:12:55 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:37076) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hIHtU-0004WX-OB for 35328@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 21 Apr 2019 15:12:53 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:54656) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hIHtM-0005Wn-Tf; Sun, 21 Apr 2019 15:12:45 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=3669 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1hIHtC-0004v9-TR; Sun, 21 Apr 2019 15:12:38 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from Philipp Stephani on Sun, 21 Apr 2019 15:58:11 +0200) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 209.51.188.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:157959 Archived-At: > From: Philipp Stephani > Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2019 15:58:11 +0200 > Cc: 35328@debbugs.gnu.org > > > > Does the code > > > (while (accept-process-output PROC)) > > > also ensure that all of the standard error has been read and passed to > > > the filter/inserted into the buffer? > > > > I don't think I understand why you say that node doesn't already > > answer this question. Why did you think standard error is special in > > this regard? > > The node doesn't describe what happens with standard error, e.g. > whether standard error is part of "output" and how it's handled. Well, it says "output", not "standard output". I take it to mean both output streams. If the text is interpreted to mean both streams, is it accurate? If it is, we only need to clarify that both standard output and standard error are included.