From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: User interaction from multiple threads Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2018 20:16:41 -0400 Message-ID: References: <838t59j821.fsf@gnu.org> <87lg92q7ih.fsf@runbox.com> <83a7phdl7r.fsf@gnu.org> <61492e7f622303d02405bedbe65fabae@webmail.orcon.net.nz> <83pnybdaer.fsf@gnu.org> <837ekicw7i.fsf@gnu.org> <877ekiierh.fsf@himinbjorg.adminart.net> <834lflb2fj.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=Utf-8 X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1535156122 9629 195.159.176.226 (25 Aug 2018 00:15:22 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2018 00:15:22 +0000 (UTC) Cc: gazally@runbox.com, hw@adminart.net, eliz@gnu.org, emacs-devel-bounces+psainty=orcon.net.nz@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Phil Sainty Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Aug 25 02:15:17 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ftMEX-0002O9-Ig for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 25 Aug 2018 02:15:17 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:44048 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ftMGd-00012t-K5 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 20:17:27 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:33507) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ftMGU-00010X-95 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 20:17:21 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ftMGL-00047Q-0s for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 20:17:12 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:33446) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ftMFu-0003EE-3d; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 20:16:42 -0400 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1ftMFt-0004lD-La; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 20:16:41 -0400 In-Reply-To: (message from Phil Sainty on Fri, 24 Aug 2018 10:34:07 +1200) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:228881 Archived-At: [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider ]]] [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]] [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]] > Undoubtedly that would often be true, but are all prompts written in > such a specific fashion to guarantee they would be unambiguous within > any arbitrary arrangement of asynchronous prompting activity? I would > be very surprised if that turned out to be true. At minimum, few if > any of the existing prompts (many of which may now be triggered in > thread contexts), will have been written with this particular scenario > in mind. I think most prompts are written under the assumption that the user knows which command perse just typed and therefore knows the context fully. So far, that's normally so -- but it won't be so with threads asking for input in parallel. -- Dr Richard Stallman President, Free Software Foundation (https://gnu.org, https://fsf.org) Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)