[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Nested sit-for's
From: |
Kim F. Storm |
Subject: |
Nested sit-for's |
Date: |
Wed, 16 Aug 2006 10:14:47 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
Chong Yidong <address@hidden> writes:
>> What about the change that we discussed where nested sit-for calls
>> should not wait longer than any of the outer calls??
>
> I haven't had a chance to spend much time on this project. One
> problem is that I haven't managed to find a simple test case that
> clearly demonstrates the old behavior is broken.
>
Try this evaluating this:
(defun st1 ()
(with-current-buffer (get-buffer-create "*st1*")
(goto-char (point-max))
(insert "<")
(sit-for 30)
(insert ">")))
(run-with-timer 1 2 'st1)
(progn
(message "sit-for...")
(sit-for 5)
(message "sit-for...done"))
Now, the sit-for...done message is shown after 30-35 seconds,
not after 5 seconds...
[repeat the last progn if you don't see the effect immediately]
The call to sit-for in the timer is probably "bad practice", but it
could just as well have happened in a process filter or some other
async handler.
--
Kim F. Storm <address@hidden> http://www.cua.dk
- Nested sit-for's,
Kim F. Storm <=
- Re: Nested sit-for's, Chong Yidong, 2006/08/16
- Re: Nested sit-for's, Richard Stallman, 2006/08/17
- Re: Nested sit-for's, Kim F. Storm, 2006/08/17
- Re: Nested sit-for's, Chong Yidong, 2006/08/17
- Re: Nested sit-for's, Kim F. Storm, 2006/08/17
- Re: Nested sit-for's, Chong Yidong, 2006/08/17
- Re: Nested sit-for's, Kim F. Storm, 2006/08/17
- Re: Nested sit-for's, Chong Yidong, 2006/08/17