Re: Calling Lisp from undo.c's record_* functions

[phillip.lord@russet.org.uk (Phillip Lord)]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>> That would work similarly to an idle timer, so yes, that would be OK
>> (tho an idle timer would be simpler).  It suffers from the same problem
>> as the idle timer: if there's no user interaction but there's continued
>> process output, we'll fail to re-run the undo-auto-timer after the
>> first N seconds of idleness.  Nothing too serious (it's still better
>> than what we have now anyway), tho.
>
> So we could start the timer not in the command loop, but somewhere in
> the loop that waits for process output, perhaps.
>
> But if an idle timer is fine, I think Phillip already has everyuthing
> sorted out on a branch.

Not entirely. Either the idle timer runs all the time (which Stefan
doesn't like), or we only run it once (which missed the case when a
process runs). This is (in my experience) an edge case, but then the
timer is there for an edge case anyway. In most circumstances, the
undo-boundaries are inserted by the command-loop, or explicitly.

I don't have a strong edge case for the timer at the moment. All the
process handling modes that I have found add undo-boundaries correctly
anyway.

Phil