[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Thu, 03 Aug 2006 11:50:55 -0400
> Another possibility just occurred to me. Unlike the old sit-for, the
> new sit-for is not interrupted by input coming from processes (as
> opposed to user input). If gnus (or some other package) relies on
> this behavior, a bug will arise.
IMO, sit-for should never be interrupted by input coming from a
subprocess (that is what accept-process-output is for), and code
which relies on that behaviour is wrong.
Did the old sit-for really wake up when process input came in?
It was never supposed to -- that would have been a bug.
But I don't recall seeing any reports of such a bug.
The bug was that input events that did not correspond to any
real input could wake it up. But process output does not
work by generating input events.