Re: Nested sit-for's

[Kim F. Storm]

martin rudalics <address@hidden> writes:

>> IIUC, the recent addition of current-idle-time by RMS was supposed to
>> fix the sit-for in jit-lock problem in a different way.  But so far,
>> RMS' changes to jit-lock have not been installed...   What's up???
>
> IIUC, `current-idle-time' would permit to replace the ugliness of my
> `run-at-time' with yet another `run-with-idle-timer'.  Hopefully.

Sounds plausible.  So I hope RMS will commit his jit-lock fix soon!

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