[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#45117: 28.0.50; process-send-string mysteriously exiting non-locally
From: |
João Távora |
Subject: |
bug#45117: 28.0.50; process-send-string mysteriously exiting non-locally when called from timer |
Date: |
Thu, 10 Dec 2020 21:16:00 +0000 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:
>>> No, I was no presuming such a simple model, actually. I was really
>>> thinking about "send data to the LSP server then get some answer
>>> a second or more later".
>> Right, so in LSP it's perfectly possible to send three requests in a
>> row, say reqX, reqY and reqZ and get three replies in a completely
>> different order repZ, repX, repY. How to you match each reply to each
>> request?
>
> I assume there's some "request-id" mechanism. Not sure what this has to
> do with this discussion, OTOH.
Right, a request-id mechanism. The request must be registered
atomically with process_send_string. If you interrupt in between, you
have inconsistent requests (either registered request-id's for which no
actual request was fired, or requests which were fired for which no
request-id's were registered). Client code can detect/prevent these
interruptions, but it's clumsy. And may cost the dev many hours to
understand what is up. Shouldn't be default IMO.
>> process_send_string may send things in "bunches", I read in the
>> docstring, but it will not (and should not) be interrupted.
>
> Indeed, I believe it should not be aborted in the middle by
> `while-no-input` (it would be a bug, because the `process-send-string`
> API doesn't offer any way to know what has been or hasn't been sent in
> that case).
Agree.
>> But that is not always so. And I think it's too eager of ElDoc to try
>> to do that so early and so brutally. It's better to leave it to the
>> callback handlers, which we have now. That's a much safer spot to
>> know if the answer we just got still makes sense. Or if we're in
>> a hurry, we let the backend know asap.
>
> You might be right: the result of the current request sent to the LSP
> could still be useful for the next eldoc-idle-time cycle, indeed.
Yes, it's only an heuristic.
>>> The contract is different for timer functions than it is for eldoc
>>> functions, yes. This is because the expectation is that eldoc functions
>>> may run for a non-negligible amount of time.
>> Why do you have that expectation? Any particular example in the wild?
> Good question.
:-)
>> It was, after all, the status quo after you changed it for 27.1.
>> Perhaps you had a rationale?
>
> I probably did, but ... can't remember and wasn't clever enough to write
> it in the commit message :-(
> Maybe to accommodate those backends which needed async operation but had
> to live within the confines of the previously limited eldoc API?
Likely, yes. But which one of those were the "blocking" type? Because
even with the limited API, SLY/SLIME were just calling eldoc-message
from the process filter. Which is equivalent to what we have now in
terms of sync. In fact, to keep backward compatibility, I haven't
touched this part of SLY at all. Anyway, you must have done it for some
other slow synchronous, wait-for-the-retval backend. That hypothetical
backend will hurt if we take back the while-no-input. OTOH that
hypothetical backend can now upgrade to a much better API.
> Maybe the maintainer of eldoc.el will prefer to undo this change,
> then ;-) ?
Who's that? ;-) But OK, eldoc.el is now distributable independently so
we have good defense against this.
João
- bug#45117: 28.0.50; process-send-string mysteriously exiting non-locally when called from timer, (continued)
- bug#45117: 28.0.50; process-send-string mysteriously exiting non-locally when called from timer, Eli Zaretskii, 2020/12/10
- bug#45117: 28.0.50; process-send-string mysteriously exiting non-locally when called from timer, João Távora, 2020/12/10
- bug#45117: 28.0.50; process-send-string mysteriously exiting non-locally when called from timer, Eli Zaretskii, 2020/12/10
- bug#45117: 28.0.50; process-send-string mysteriously exiting non-locally when called from timer, João Távora, 2020/12/10
- bug#45117: 28.0.50; process-send-string mysteriously exiting non-locally when called from timer, Dmitry Gutov, 2020/12/10
- bug#45117: 28.0.50; process-send-string mysteriously exiting non-locally when called from timer, Stefan Monnier, 2020/12/10
- bug#45117: 28.0.50; process-send-string mysteriously exiting non-locally when called from timer, João Távora, 2020/12/10
- bug#45117: 28.0.50; process-send-string mysteriously exiting non-locally when called from timer, Stefan Monnier, 2020/12/10
- bug#45117: 28.0.50; process-send-string mysteriously exiting non-locally when called from timer, Dmitry Gutov, 2020/12/10
- bug#45117: 28.0.50; process-send-string mysteriously exiting non-locally when called from timer, Stefan Monnier, 2020/12/10
- bug#45117: 28.0.50; process-send-string mysteriously exiting non-locally when called from timer,
João Távora <=
- bug#45117: 28.0.50; process-send-string mysteriously exiting non-locally when called from timer, João Távora, 2020/12/10
- bug#45117: 28.0.50; process-send-string mysteriously exiting non-locally when called from timer, Eli Zaretskii, 2020/12/11
- bug#45117: 28.0.50; process-send-string mysteriously exiting non-locally when called from timer, Stefan Monnier, 2020/12/11
- bug#45117: 28.0.50; process-send-string mysteriously exiting non-locally when called from timer, Eli Zaretskii, 2020/12/11
- bug#45117: 28.0.50; process-send-string mysteriously exiting non-locally when called from timer, João Távora, 2020/12/11
- bug#45117: 28.0.50; process-send-string mysteriously exiting non-locally when called from timer, João Távora, 2020/12/11
- bug#45117: 28.0.50; process-send-string mysteriously exiting non-locally when called from timer, Stefan Monnier, 2020/12/11
- bug#45117: 28.0.50; process-send-string mysteriously exiting non-locally when called from timer, João Távora, 2020/12/13
- bug#45117: 28.0.50; process-send-string mysteriously exiting non-locally when called from timer, Stefan Monnier, 2020/12/13
- bug#45117: 28.0.50; process-send-string mysteriously exiting non-locally when called from timer, Eli Zaretskii, 2020/12/10