On Sat, 25 Aug 2018 at 19:58, Michael Albinus <michael.albinus@gmx.de>
wrote:

> Elias Mårtenson <lokedhs@gmail.com> writes:
>
> Hi Elias,
>
> > May I propose that the murex be hidden behind a function and a macro?
> > The purpose of this would be to allow for the function to adviced by
> > libraries that want to do something special. Something like this:
> >
> > (defmacro with-prompt-interaction (&body body)
> >   (call-with-prompt-interaction `(lambda ()  ,@body)))
> >
> > (defun call-with-prompt-interaction (fn)
> >   (with-mutex (interaction-mutex)
> >     (funcall fn)))
> >
> > This would allow advices to be applied to the
> > call-with-prompt-interaction function.
>
> But then you must force everybody to use the
> `call-with-prompt-interaction' function.


Well, yes. Although I'd expect new code to use ‘with-prompt-interaction’.


> Doesn't it suffice to advice
> `mutex-lock' and `mutex-unlock'? In your advice code you could check,
> whether MUTEX is equal to `interaction-mutex'.
>

That would be possible, but looks rather ugly to me. Also, the fact that a
mutex is used should be an implementation detail not visible to the user of
the API. Having a dedicated function/macro pair for this is much cleaner.

Regards,
Elias