Re: address@hidden: sit-for (detect_input_pending ?) and postfix input methods.]

[Kim F. Storm]

"Richard M. Stallman" <address@hidden> writes:

>     Then, why does sit-for return t if unread-command-events is not
>     nil?
>
> That is a good question.  Should it return nil immediately
> without waiting when unread-command-events is nonempty?
> That would be more coherent than the current behavior.
> It would also be an incompatible change, and might break something.
>
> There are about 550 calls to sit-for in the Emacs sources.
> To check all of them would be a lot of work.
>
> Perhaps we should make this change now, so that the pretesting
> for the release will help us see if anything breaks.
> What do people think?

Why take the risk of breaking currently working code this close (YMMV)
to the release...?

IMO, this is not the time for such a change in 22.x -- we know of one
place (flyspell) that was affected by the present behaviuor and it has
been fixed now.  

OTOH, you can install the change now on the unicode-2 branch for 23.x.

-- 
Kim F. Storm <address@hidden> http://www.cua.dk