GNU bug report logs - #1973
Bug in simple.el (Emacs version 22.2.1)

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: help-debbugs <at> gnu.org (Emacs bug Tracking System)
To: Sebastian Tennant <sebyte <at> smolny.plus.com>
Subject: bug#2103 closed by Chong Yidong <cyd <at> stupidchicken.com> (Re: Bug
 in simple.el (Emacs version 22.2.1))
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 04:45:05 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

This is an automatic notification regarding your bug report
which was filed against the emacs package:

#1973: Bug in simple.el

It has been closed by Chong Yidong <cyd <at> stupidchicken.com>.

Their explanation is attached below along with your original report.
If this explanation is unsatisfactory and you have not received a
better one in a separate message then please contact Chong Yidong <cyd <at> stupidchicken.com> by
replying to this email.


-- 
1973: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=1973
Emacs Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs <at> gnu.org with problems

[Message part 2 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: Chong Yidong <cyd <at> stupidchicken.com>
To: 1973-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: Bug in simple.el (Emacs version 22.2.1)
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 00:40:04 -0400

Closing Bug#1973, since async-shell-command is now in the trunk.

[Message part 3 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: Sebastian Tennant <sebyte <at> smolny.plus.com>
To: bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
Subject: Re: Bug in simple.el
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 07:06:22 +0000

Hi Stefan,

Returning to the bug list, in case others have opinions on the matter...

Quoth Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>:
>> Apologies for contacting you off-list.  I'm doing so just in case you'd
>> given up on me.  My penultimate email to the Emacs bug list was
>> something of a rant!
>>
>> Since then I think I've found the perfect solution.  A hook needs to be
>> added to simple.el providing ^M handling and we don't need to change
>> anything in shell-command.
>>
>>  http://article.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.help/61630
>
> Hooks are great for users, but for internal use they're usually
> better avoided since we can change the code directly instead.

But in this case, some users may not want ^M handling, so providing a
hook gives users the choice, no?

> E.g. in this case we want to change shell-command.

I agree that given the command is called 'shell-command' it would make
sense for ^M characters to be handled in shell-like way, i.e., no ^Ms,
in which case perhaps we should provide a spearate command for users who
_don't_ want ^M handling; 'unfiltered-shell-command' or something like
that?

Then again, adding a hook and leaving shell-command as it stands is the
simplest option and has the advantage of not breaking anything, i.e.,
no backward compatibility issues.

Seb

Previous Next

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