From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
Subject: Re: Single process output reading
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 00:48:59 -0400
Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Message-ID: <E1By1Kl-0002zc-V2@fencepost.gnu.org>
References: <874qn35tgf.fsf@zamazal.org> <E1BxFLX-0003Sp-Tl@fencepost.gnu.org>
	<87isbgrx0z.fsf@blackbird.zamazal.org>
Reply-To: rms@gnu.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org
X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1092977372 19552 80.91.224.253 (20 Aug 2004 04:49:32 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 04:49:32 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Aug 20 06:49:22 2004
Return-path: <emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165])
	by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
	id 1By1L7-0003Ej-00
	for <ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org>; Fri, 20 Aug 2004 06:49:21 +0200
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33)
	id 1By1PP-0000Wi-FM
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 20 Aug 2004 00:53:47 -0400
Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33)
	id 1By1PI-0000WY-IY
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 20 Aug 2004 00:53:40 -0400
Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33)
	id 1By1PH-0000W5-Tx
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 20 Aug 2004 00:53:40 -0400
Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1By1PH-0000Vt-Pw
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 20 Aug 2004 00:53:39 -0400
Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1By1Km-0002bP-I6
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 20 Aug 2004 00:49:00 -0400
Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.34)
	id 1By1Kl-0002zc-V2; Fri, 20 Aug 2004 00:49:00 -0400
Original-To: Milan Zamazal <pdm@brailcom.org>
In-reply-to: <87isbgrx0z.fsf@blackbird.zamazal.org> (message from Milan
	Zamazal on Wed, 18 Aug 2004 22:50:20 +0200)
X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." <emacs-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/emacs-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:26336
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:26336

    Why?  There are already many ways how to prevent running timers for a
    while in Emacs, like running a piece of Elisp code or calling a process
    synchronously.  So what's the problem with the special-case
    accept-process-output call?

I guess you are right.