[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: while-no-input

From: Stefan Monnier
Subject: Re: while-no-input
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 09:44:03 -0400

>     IIRC, RMS said that using signal like that was very unclean and using
>     throw would be cleaner.
> That is the first thing I said.  Afterwards I agreed to a modified
> version of the change which avoids the ugliness at the Lisp level.

I don't understand what you're referring to.
Are you saying that you did agree to a version that was not using `throw' ?
What ugliness at the Lisp level ?

I still have no idea what you mean by "ugly" in reference to my patch.
All it does is allow you to make normal keystrokes generate a quit event
and it also allows you to check which kind of quit event is generated
so you can tell the difference between a C-g quit and an any-key quit.

Using throw for such any-key quit sounds just plain wrong to me since
it is very much a `quit' like any other, that obeys inhibit-quit and
that aborts the current execution.

As I said, I'd probably settle for `throw' because I care more about
having the feature at all than about implementing it right (from my
point of view), but if I have to settle for `throw', it'll take me much
more time to get the patch ready/tested/installed, so someone else
might want to do it before me.


reply via email to

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