From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
To: Dan Nicolaescu <dann@gnu.org>
Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: split up process.c
Date: Sun, 11 Jul 2010 09:10:38 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <83vd8mv99d.fsf@gnu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <yxqocee1y9i.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org>
> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
> From: Dan Nicolaescu <dann@gnu.org>
> Date: Sat, 10 Jul 2010 23:40:57 -0400
>
> > There's now only one function, wait_reading_process_output, which has
> > 2 different implementations. (I could easily have a single function
> > with two different bodies conditioned by `subprocesses', or I could
> > move the second implementation to msdos.c, if people prefer that. But
> > both alternatives looked no cleaner, and the latter would even make
> > more maintenance headaches, IMO.)
>
> IMO it should go to msdos.c unless that requires other important code changes.
I will defer to Stefan and Yidong for the decision. Personally, I
think having a function with the same name on two different source
files will make maintenance a tad harder than it is when they are on
the same file.
> BTW, it's kind of funny that msdos.c has MSDOS and subpprocesses #ifdefs.
A long time ago I had plans to implement async subprocesses for the
MS-DOS port, and OTOH didn't dare to futz with non-MSDOS sources.
Thanks, I fixed this now (by reusing the similar definitions in
process.c).
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-07-11 6:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-07-08 18:33 Changes in process.c Eli Zaretskii
2010-07-08 18:52 ` split up process.c [was: Re: Changes in process.c] Dan Nicolaescu
2010-07-08 20:35 ` Eli Zaretskii
2010-07-08 23:05 ` Dan Nicolaescu
2010-07-09 23:01 ` split up process.c Glenn Morris
2010-07-10 1:35 ` Dan Nicolaescu
2010-07-10 13:43 ` split up process.c [was: Re: Changes in process.c] Eli Zaretskii
2010-07-11 3:40 ` split up process.c Dan Nicolaescu
2010-07-11 6:10 ` Eli Zaretskii [this message]
2010-07-11 14:48 ` Chong Yidong
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=83vd8mv99d.fsf@gnu.org \
--to=eliz@gnu.org \
--cc=dann@gnu.org \
--cc=emacs-devel@gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this external index
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs/org-mode.git
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.