From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: process-list in Elisp Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2011 16:12:09 -0500 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1298754752 30420 80.91.229.12 (26 Feb 2011 21:12:32 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2011 21:12:32 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Leo Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Feb 26 22:12:28 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PtRRD-00006q-Mu for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 26 Feb 2011 22:12:27 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:51490 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PtRRD-0000Sz-3x for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 26 Feb 2011 16:12:27 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=38020 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PtRR1-0000Nz-20 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 26 Feb 2011 16:12:19 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PtRQw-0005cf-6F for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 26 Feb 2011 16:12:14 -0500 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.183]:20154 helo=ironport2-out.pppoe.ca) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PtRQv-0005cY-U9 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 26 Feb 2011 16:12:10 -0500 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvsEADP7aE1FpZIs/2dsb2JhbACmRXW7B4VhBIUQj18 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.62,232,1297054800"; d="scan'208";a="93670941" Original-Received: from 69-165-146-44.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO ceviche.home) ([69.165.146.44]) by ironport2-out.pppoe.ca with ESMTP/TLS/ADH-AES256-SHA; 26 Feb 2011 16:12:09 -0500 Original-Received: by ceviche.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 1730B660D6; Sat, 26 Feb 2011 16:12:09 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: (Leo's message of "Tue, 22 Feb 2011 15:11:43 +0800") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 206.248.154.183 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:136563 Archived-At: > I attach an implementation of list-processes in elisp that's more or > less equivalent to the primitive list-processes except it no longer pops > up an empty buffer when the process list is empty. In order to limit the complaints, I'd like to make sure the "more or less" is closer to more than to less. One thing that is immediately obvious is that the original code uses with-output-to-temp-buffer whereas you use something else, so your code doesn't obey the various hooks run by with-output-to-temp-buffer. Was there a particular reason for this change? Do you know of other similar changes to the behavior? Have you followed the C source code when writing the new code, or have you simply tried to reproduce the behavior you saw? Stefan