[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

bug#24585: 25.1; avoid hack in ggtags.el to run compilation-auto-jump ti

From: Stefan Monnier
Subject: bug#24585: 25.1; avoid hack in ggtags.el to run compilation-auto-jump timer
Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2016 16:35:57 -0400
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.2.50 (gnu/linux)

> I think the hack in ggtags.el may be removed by the following patch to
> correct the said mistake:

IIUC this patch just changes the ordering for same-time timers.
Relying on either ordering is itself a hack.  We need a better solution.

What are those two timers whose relative execution order matters?
Why do they care in which order they're run?


> diff --git a/lisp/emacs-lisp/timer.el b/lisp/emacs-lisp/timer.el
> index c01ea497..337e1049 100644
> --- a/lisp/emacs-lisp/timer.el
> +++ b/lisp/emacs-lisp/timer.el
> @@ -130,9 +130,9 @@ floating point number."
>       (setq delta (time-add delta (list 0 0 (or usecs 0) (or psecs 0)))))
>      (time-add time delta)))
> -(defun timer--time-less-p (t1 t2)
> +(defun timer--time-less-or-equal-p (t1 t2)
>    "Say whether time value T1 is less than time value T2."
> -  (time-less-p (timer--time t1) (timer--time t2)))
> +  (not (time-less-p (timer--time t2) (timer--time t1))))
>  (defun timer-inc-time (timer secs &optional usecs psecs)
>    "Increment the time set in TIMER by SECS seconds, USECS microseconds,
> @@ -172,7 +172,7 @@ fire repeatedly that many seconds apart."
>        (let ((timers (if idle timer-idle-list timer-list))
>           last)
>       ;; Skip all timers to trigger before the new one.
> -     (while (and timers (timer--time-less-p (car timers) timer))
> +     (while (and timers (timer--time-less-or-equal-p (car timers) timer))
>         (setq last timers
>               timers (cdr timers)))
>       (if reuse-cell

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]