GNU bug report logs - #17392
24.3.90; cursor blinks faster and faster

Previous Next

Package: emacs;

Reported by: michael_heerdegen <at> web.de

Date: Sat, 3 May 2014 01:45:02 UTC

Severity: normal

Found in version 24.3.90

Done: Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> IRO.UMontreal.CA>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Full log


View this message in rfc822 format

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: monnier <at> IRO.UMontreal.CA
Cc: michael_heerdegen <at> web.de, 17392 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#17392: 24.3.90; cursor blinks faster and faster
Date: Wed, 14 May 2014 17:59:55 +0300
> Date: Wed, 14 May 2014 05:43:16 +0300
> From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
> Cc: michael_heerdegen <at> web.de, 17392 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> 
> > How 'bout: the list contains two timers, we copy it, then run the first
> > which removes the second, then run the second which doesn't find itself
> > in the list.
> 
> I thought about this, but (a) I don't see where the blink-cursor timer
> removes any other timers

Actually, this is inaccurate: blink-cursor-timer-function, which runs
off a regular (non-idle) timer, sometimes calls blink-cursor-suspend,
which cancels the blink-cursor-idle-timer.

But this looks perfectly normal, and indeed if Michael's advice runs
when the idle timer expired, it might find that the idle timer that
runs was already deleted from timer-idle-list, because we invoke the
timers from a copy of the list.  If this is what happens, then what
Michael's code reveals is an artifact of a perfectly normal and
expected operation.  I cannot see how this could cause more than one
blink-cursor-idle-timer be in the list at the same time.

> (b) I don't see why this scenario would be a problem that could lead
> to the issue in point in the first place.

So this still stands.




This bug report was last modified 11 years and 59 days ago.

Previous Next


GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.