Re: [gareth.jones@stud.man.ac.uk: Re: pop3-read-response not robust in the presence of timers]

[Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>]

    >     One could also approach this from the opposite side -- slapping (the
    >     equivalent of) `save-buffer-excursion' around the timer functions
    >
    > That would be one way to implement it for all the functions that can
    > run timers, including accept-process-output, read-event and
    > read-key-sequence.

    I think Lars' suggestion was to slap the functions that are run from
    the timers, instead of the functions that run the timers.

That is more or less what I originally proposed, I think.
The reason I think Lars meant changing the C code is the words
"the equivalent of".

Anyway, regardless of what Lars had in mind, the idea of making the C
code to run timers also preserve the current buffer is an idea
worth considering.