Re: How about making `sleep-for' interactive?

[Marcin Borkowski <mbork@mbork.pl>]

On 2019-06-27, at 09:46, Søren Pilgård <fiskomaten@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 6:47 AM Marcin Borkowski <mbork@mbork.pl> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I noticed today that `sleep-for' is not an (interactive) command.  IMHO
>> it should be - at least I can see a need for it.  Here is my use case.
>> I recorded a keyboard macro which edits the text in some way.  The macro
>> begins with isearching for something (which may be outside the part of
>> the buffer currently seen) and then changing.  Having e.g. a 1-second
>> delay between moving to that part and actually changing it would help
>> spot mistakes.
>>
>> Since `sleep-for' is a builtin, I can't prepare a patch (I don't speak
>> C very well), but if I get a hint I can try (just to learn something
>> new).
>>
>> WDYT?
>>
>
> I can't really see the use.
> You could always just do ```M-: (sleep-foor xxx)``` in the macro.
> Being time sensitive and waiting for abortion is a bit too dangerous
> in my taste, either I am sure and do it everywhere or I want to accept
> / decline in cases like that.
>
> What I usually do in cases like that is to make a macro that moves to
> the next occurrence, then does the changes and then moves to just the
> beginning of the next occurrence again.
> That way I can just call the macro repeatedly and it will move forward
> to the next place where a change will happen each time.
> If I decide not to apply the macro I will skip forward, either
> searching manually for the next occurrence or sometimes just moving
> the point forward so the macro will edit the next occurrence instead.

Good points.  In addition to that, I discovered that screen is not
updated during macro execution, so my solution would have to involve
updating the display.

Let's forget about this idea.

Thanks,

-- 
Marcin Borkowski
http://mbork.pl