From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dan Nicolaescu Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: split up process.c Date: Sat, 10 Jul 2010 23:40:57 -0400 Message-ID: References: <83d3ux7ris.fsf@gnu.org> <83lj9lbtka.fsf@gnu.org> <83ocefa1v1.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1278819666 14043 80.91.229.12 (11 Jul 2010 03:41:06 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 11 Jul 2010 03:41:06 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Jul 11 05:41:05 2010 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 1OXnPc-0005N6-ML for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 11 Jul 2010 05:41:04 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40920 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OXnPb-0000A8-V1 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 10 Jul 2010 23:41:03 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=53359 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OXnPX-00009B-8L for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Jul 2010 23:40:59 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1OXnPW-0006A7-0Z for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Jul 2010 23:40:59 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]:58479) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1OXnPV-0006A1-PW for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Jul 2010 23:40:57 -0400 Original-Received: from dann by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OXnPV-0006w8-LJ; Sat, 10 Jul 2010 23:40:57 -0400 In-Reply-To: <83ocefa1v1.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Sat\, 10 Jul 2010 16\:43\:46 +0300") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.1 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) 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:127029 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org >> From: Dan Nicolaescu >> Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2010 19:05:29 -0400 >> >> Eli Zaretskii writes: >> >> >> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org >> >> From: Dan Nicolaescu >> >> Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2010 14:52:39 -0400 >> >> >> >> Why don't we split the part for supporting MS-DOS into a different >> >> file: process-no-subprocesses.c (or some better name) >> >> >> >> That makes the file easier to read, less clunky, and problems easier >> >> to catch with a simple grep. >> > >> > It will still leave two implementations of the same code. >> >> That's better than what we currently have. > > I did something more radical (revno 100767): unify the two branches of > process.c. Thanks! > There's now only one function, wait_reading_process_output, which has > 2 different implementations. (I could easily have a single function > with two different bodies conditioned by `subprocesses', or I could > move the second implementation to msdos.c, if people prefer that. But > both alternatives looked no cleaner, and the latter would even make > more maintenance headaches, IMO.) IMO it should go to msdos.c unless that requires other important code changes. > Other than this single function, the rest is unified, at the cost of a > few "#ifdef subprocesses" here and there. Not surprisingly, I found > and fixed a few bugs along the way... BTW, it's kind of funny that msdos.c has MSDOS and subpprocesses #ifdefs.