Re: threads and kill-buffer

[Stefan Monnier]

> However, in the long run it would be good to make threads preemptive.
> In this case, it seems to me that switching the current buffer like this
> would be very surprising.  (But maybe still ok?)

If/when we make threads preemptive, I think the answer should be that
set-buffer would lock the buffer and kill-buffer would block until the
buffer is unlocked.
But preemption seems to be pretty far into the future, so I wouldn't
worry too much about it.

> One idea here would be to make various operations on buffers throw an
> exception if the killed buffer were used.  For example, "insert" would
> do this.

I don't think this is a good solution.

> Yet another idea is to make kill-buffer refuse to do this.

Rather than block, we could also make kill-buffer signal an error.
The advantage being that we can also provide this behavior for the
non-preemptive case and I think it would also help debug the problem
Lars points out.


        Stefan