From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: simple patch for `etags.el' Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2004 14:09:00 +0200 Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <200409201650.26315.pogonyshev@gmx.net> <200409212200.22757.pogonyshev@gmx.net> <200409221204.49928.pogonyshev@gmx.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1095854983 25032 80.91.229.6 (22 Sep 2004 12:09:43 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2004 12:09:43 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, rms@gnu.org, Paul Pogonyshev Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Sep 22 14:09:36 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1CA5wF-0005Cw-00 for ; Wed, 22 Sep 2004 14:09:35 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CA62E-000064-D8 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 22 Sep 2004 08:15:46 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CA627-00005d-NS for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Sep 2004 08:15:39 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CA626-00005C-So for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Sep 2004 08:15:39 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CA626-000057-RB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Sep 2004 08:15:38 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CA5vs-00014V-2M for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Sep 2004 08:09:12 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lola.goethe.zz) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CA5vk-0002gS-KE; Wed, 22 Sep 2004 08:09:05 -0400 Original-To: storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) In-Reply-To: (Kim F. Storm's message of "Wed, 22 Sep 2004 13:47:51 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.1006 (Gnus v5.10.6) Emacs/21.3.50 (gnu/linux) 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: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:27430 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:27430 storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) writes: > Paul Pogonyshev writes: > >> Actually, my patch did just this: >> >> (when (and (reached-next-percentage) >> (enough-time-has-passed)) >> > > I was thinking about > > (when (reached-next-percentage) > (setq next-percentage (1+ next-percentage)) ; or similar > (when (enougn-time-has-passed) > (message ...))) I don't see the difference. In either case, enough-time-has-passed is only examined once the next percentage value has been reached (which can be more than just (1+ next-percentage) anyway). -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum