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: more url-utils? Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 09:16:07 -0300 Message-ID: References: <87fwogaxzb.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87mxilezg8.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87boz0eov8.fsf@lifelogs.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1305720979 32678 80.91.229.12 (18 May 2011 12:16:19 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 12:16:19 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Ted Zlatanov Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed May 18 14:16:14 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QMffi-0003pq-F0 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 18 May 2011 14:16:14 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:49388 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QMffh-0006Gk-To for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 18 May 2011 08:16:13 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:53363) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QMfff-0006GO-Dc for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 18 May 2011 08:16:12 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QMffe-000531-FV for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 18 May 2011 08:16:11 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]:35752) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QMffe-00052x-E0 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 18 May 2011 08:16:10 -0400 Original-Received: from 213-159-126-200.fibertel.com.ar ([200.126.159.213]:53695 helo=ceviche.home) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QMffd-00021F-OW; Wed, 18 May 2011 08:16:09 -0400 Original-Received: by ceviche.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id AC74666131; Wed, 18 May 2011 09:16:07 -0300 (ART) In-Reply-To: <87boz0eov8.fsf@lifelogs.com> (Ted Zlatanov's message of "Tue, 17 May 2011 21:14:51 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 140.186.70.10 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:139484 Archived-At: >>> 3) Asynchronous usage with a callback (`url-headers-alist', >>> `url-headers-as-string', and `url-retrieved-ok' are still available): >>> (with-url-contents-buffer "http://host" '((url-request-method "POST")) callback-closure >>> (message "this will run AFTER the retrieval and the callback-closure are done")) SM> In which sense is this asynchronous? > Same as the current url.el code. So you mean that, while the `body' is run after the retrieval is done, the code after with-url-contents-buffer will be run earlier? SM> What's the difference between the code run in call-back-closure from SM> the code in `body'? > Since I'm proposing a macro, the callback-closure is funcalled while the > body is inlined. I don't know what you mean by "funcalled vs inlined" (in my world, "inlined" means it's implemented slightly differently, but the behavior is identical). Stefan