Re: why "in_sighandler"?

[Stefan Monnier]

>> Could someone explain the difference between `handling_signal' and
>> `in_sighandler'?  Depending on the answer I'm likely to suggest a renaming,
>> since it seems that either they are the same and should be merged or they
>> are different and should say so directly in their name.
>> 

> handling_signal may be non-zero even if no signal handler is invoked.
> For example, from UNBLOCK_INPUT (via reinvoke_input_signal =>
> handle_async_input).  Also if SYNC_INPUT is used.  So handling_signal really
> means "handling X11/GUI event".  I needed a variable that was only set when
> the signal handler is running.  Maybe setting handling_signal is an error in
> the non-signalling cases, I don't really know.

Oh, I see, thanks.

Yes, the distinction is subtle.  For what it's worth, I believe that
handling_signal shouldn't need to be set when handle_async_input is called
synchronously via reinvoke_input_signal.  I.e. it should behave the same as
in_sighanlder ;-).  But we shouldn't try such a change now, of course.


        Stefan