I see. So it would be an all-or-nothing hard-coded global, then.

On Fri, Feb 7, 2025 at 7:55 AM Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:

> > From: Ship Mints <shipmints@gmail.com>
> > Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2025 07:32:48 -0500
> > Cc: Andrew Cohen <acohen@ust.hk>, 63620@debbugs.gnu.org,
> monnier@iro.umontreal.ca,
> >       michael.albinus@gmx.de
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 7, 2025 at 7:18 AM Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
> >
> >  > Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2025 19:43:32 +0800 (GMT+08:00)
> >  > From: Andrew Cohen <acohen@ust.hk>
> >  > Cc: 63620@debbugs.gnu.org, Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>,
> >  >       Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>, michael.albinus@gmx.de
> >  >
> >  > Can I get any feedback about the file descriptor closure issue? From
> what
> >  > I can tell without exposing it in lisp the way I did I won't be able
> to
> >  > use blocking anyway.
> >
> >  But since there could be only one such descriptor at any given time,
> >  why would any Lisp program need to know its value?  It sounds like we
> >  need to record the descriptor internally, and then close it in C, no?
> >  Maybe some D-Bus related primitive could do that?
> >
> > This is why I suggested that the lower-level C code return opaque
> cookies that can be used to send back to
> > lower-level code to operate on them, such as closing an fd.
>
> I'm asking why return such cookies to Lisp at all.
>