From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: hidden buffers for async Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2005 11:03:10 -0400 Message-ID: References: <6dbd4d0005060619227dd41364@mail.gmail.com> <87vf4oaft8.fsf@zemdatav.stor.no-ip.org> <87vf4oaao5.fsf@kanga.tapsellferrier.co.uk> <87ll5ka5j7.fsf@zemdatav.stor.no-ip.org> <87is0oa35h.fsf_-_@kanga.tapsellferrier.co.uk> <874qc4tzbo.fsf@kanga.tapsellferrier.co.uk> <87u0k3cq6g.fsf@kanga.tapsellferrier.co.uk> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1118675694 2219 80.91.229.2 (13 Jun 2005 15:14:54 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2005 15:14:54 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jun 13 17:14:53 2005 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Dhqe9-0005Ee-Ow for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 13 Jun 2005 17:14:42 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Dhqiy-0000Wm-0e for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 13 Jun 2005 11:19:40 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1DhqWs-0002FB-Fo for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Jun 2005 11:07:10 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1DhqWe-00024R-VL for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Jun 2005 11:06:57 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DhqWV-000243-KB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Jun 2005 11:06:47 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1DhqUb-0002wI-6J for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Jun 2005 11:04:49 -0400 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.34) id 1DhqT0-0000ob-Ht; Mon, 13 Jun 2005 11:03:10 -0400 Original-To: Nic Ferrier In-reply-to: <87u0k3cq6g.fsf@kanga.tapsellferrier.co.uk> (message from Nic Ferrier on Sun, 12 Jun 2005 20:48:07 +0100) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:38727 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:38727 The advantage of multiple buffers is that the downloaded files can be viewed straight away, with no further copying. I am not sure what you're really trying to do here. Is your goal to ultimately have each message in a separate buffer? Or is the goal to write them into files on disk? > That should work, if it is ok to do only 20 transfers in parallel. > It should block, not error, when all are in use. Why? I suspect we are miscommunicating, talking about different levels of code. However, I can't see why it could be useful for any level whatsoever to get an error just because someone asks it to download more than 20 messages.