From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Andreas Schwab Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Asynchronous DNS Date: Mon, 08 Feb 2016 13:55:01 +0100 Message-ID: References: <86y4b5zvzt.fsf@gmail.com> <8760y9kwrk.fsf@gnus.org> <8760y7nag7.fsf@gnus.org> <83oabzzsjq.fsf@gnu.org> <87fuxazkfe.fsf@gnus.org> <83io25yeqk.fsf@gnu.org> <87h9hpnreg.fsf@gnus.org> <83y4b0wi7m.fsf@gnu.org> <87si17evk6.fsf@gnus.org> <83twlnvcz2.fsf@gnu.org> <87vb63obm3.fsf@gnus.org> <87r3gqmg6g.fsf@gnus.org> <83egcqtfnm.fsf@gnu.org> <86mvrdmk8p.fsf@realize.ch> <877fihjo4m.fsf@gnus.org> <86io20n3xn.fsf@realize.ch> <8760y055l1.fsf@gnus.org> <86wpqfl8ly.fsf@realize.ch> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1454936152 6829 80.91.229.3 (8 Feb 2016 12:55:52 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2016 12:55:52 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Lars Ingebrigtsen , Eli Zaretskii , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Alain Schneble Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Feb 08 13:55:43 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1aSlLz-0006lC-07 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 13:55:43 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:44295 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aSlLt-0007T5-FP for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 07:55:37 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:56759) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aSlLS-00070M-Ur for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 07:55:14 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aSlLP-0008D4-AC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 07:55:10 -0500 Original-Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:41104) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aSlLK-000892-6M; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 07:55:02 -0500 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Original-Received: from relay2.suse.de (charybdis-ext.suse.de [195.135.220.254]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5493AAAB4; Mon, 8 Feb 2016 12:55:01 +0000 (UTC) X-Yow: Yow! STYROFOAM.. In-Reply-To: <86wpqfl8ly.fsf@realize.ch> (Alain Schneble's message of "Mon, 8 Feb 2016 12:55:21 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x (no timestamps) [generic] X-Received-From: 195.135.220.15 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:199501 Archived-At: Alain Schneble writes: > Andreas Schwab writes: > >> Lars Ingebrigtsen writes: >> >>> It would be better if the application code didn't have to care, but that >>> means that either all those functions will have to block (getting us >>> back to square one, basically), or they'll have to set up a queue of >>> pending actions to be taken, which I think is rather too ambitious. >> >> There's still the benefit of blocking in the Emacs event loop instead of >> a system call, with the former Emacs can still run other process >> filters. > > That sounds interesting, but would it really be feasible to call out to > the event loop while in the blocking call? That's what accept-process-output does. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, SUSE Labs, schwab@suse.de GPG Key fingerprint = 0196 BAD8 1CE9 1970 F4BE 1748 E4D4 88E3 0EEA B9D7 "And now for something completely different."