Re: run-with-timer vs run-with-idle-timer

["João Távora" <joaotavora@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1411 bytes --]

On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 9:00 PM, Davis Herring <herring@lanl.gov> wrote:
>>>
>>> An idle timer set for 600 seconds will run when ten minutes have
>>> elapsed since the last user command was finished, even if subprocess
>>> output has been accepted thousands of times within those ten minutes,
>>> and even if there have been garbage collections and autosaves.
>>
>>
>> Doesn't this contradict what you told me first?  I.e doesn't this
>> contradict the fact that this never returns?
>>
>>    (catch 'done
>>      (run-with-idle-timer 600 nil (lambda () (throw 'done nil)))
>>      (while t (accept-process-output nil 0.1))) ; 6 thousand times
>>
>> or should the manual be saying "even if subprocesses output has been
>> non-explictly accepted thousands of times"?
>
>
> No, because whatever command you used to invoke that code (C-x C-e in the
trivial case) doesn't finish unless and until the loop finishes.  So no
time has yet "elapsed since the last user command was finished", regardless
of anything about subprocesses.

Indeed.

(run-with-timer
 1 nil
 (lambda ()
   (catch 'done
     (run-with-idle-timer 3 nil (lambda () (throw 'done nil)))
     (while t (accept-process-output nil 0.1)))
   (message "ok!")))

Does print "ok". However this blocks typing for 3 seconds. So in a way,
it forces idleness. Gross idea anyway. Wonder what happens in the filter...

João

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2209 bytes --]