From unknown Fri Jun 13 11:39:49 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#37875: 27.0.50; `run-with-timer' not documented in (elisp)Timers Resent-From: Phil Sainty Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2019 18:39:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: report 37875 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: 37875@debbugs.gnu.org X-Debbugs-Original-To: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Received: via spool by submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B.15717694969826 (code B ref -1); Tue, 22 Oct 2019 18:39:01 +0000 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 22 Oct 2019 18:38:16 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60486 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iMz2u-0002YO-3Q for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 22 Oct 2019 14:38:16 -0400 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:47875) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iMz2r-0002YE-TQ for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 22 Oct 2019 14:38:14 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:59515) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iMz2q-0004RL-S7 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 22 Oct 2019 14:38:13 -0400 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_40,FREEMAIL_FROM, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPOOFED_FREEMAIL autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iMz2p-0005gj-TJ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 22 Oct 2019 14:38:12 -0400 Received: from smtp-1.orcon.net.nz ([60.234.4.34]:54945) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iMz2p-0005fu-JD for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 22 Oct 2019 14:38:11 -0400 Received: from [116.251.203.173] (port=14103 helo=[192.168.20.103]) by smtp-1.orcon.net.nz with esmtpa (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iMz2k-0000cd-Fa for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 23 Oct 2019 07:38:06 +1300 From: Phil Sainty Message-ID: <7a3175eb-dc19-afe7-b5fa-964eabf31ace@orcon.net.nz> Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2019 07:38:06 +1300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-GB Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-GeoIP: NZ X-Spam_score: -2.9 X-Spam_score_int: -28 X-Spam_bar: -- X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 60.234.4.34 X-Spam-Score: 0.4 (/) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) I just noticed that `run-with-timer' is not mentioned anywhere in the elisp manual. (elisp)Timers even mentions `run-with-idle-timer', which also has its own node at (elisp)Idle Timers; however `run-with-timer' is not pointed out. From unknown Fri Jun 13 11:39:49 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#37875: 27.0.50; `run-with-timer' not documented in (elisp)Timers Resent-From: Michael Heerdegen Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2019 07:02:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 37875 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Phil Sainty Cc: 37875@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 37875-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B37875.15718141086819 (code B ref 37875); Wed, 23 Oct 2019 07:02:02 +0000 Received: (at 37875) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Oct 2019 07:01:48 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60765 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iNAeS-0001lv-5I for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 23 Oct 2019 03:01:48 -0400 Received: from mout.web.de ([217.72.192.78]:60277) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iNAeP-0001lf-7p for 37875@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 23 Oct 2019 03:01:46 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=web.de; s=dbaedf251592; t=1571814089; bh=+UiUiOKeI8L5eX3VxnnB7kChfz5jUiSS1bmVh+/3aas=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To; b=USgVsWn7MLvX9e8nLSOE0W1co3JUPGM01Z4sCq3yuqZBQOgaEMsc4darZh3jmo3qy Wx5t69Q2fEDq5kWKb79sI/tmLxNkso8cr3pD2cllPMs1z2glh7qfS5oT4BujGyyUiG JCUJmOmlWQdktZkfz2ANNUM+eYPHRdyeMedZkqb8= X-UI-Sender-Class: c548c8c5-30a9-4db5-a2e7-cb6cb037b8f9 Received: from drachen.dragon ([94.218.222.9]) by smtp.web.de (mrweb102 [213.165.67.124]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0M7KN0-1i86F51lfq-00wzbX; Wed, 23 Oct 2019 09:01:29 +0200 From: Michael Heerdegen References: <7a3175eb-dc19-afe7-b5fa-964eabf31ace@orcon.net.nz> Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2019 09:01:37 +0200 In-Reply-To: <7a3175eb-dc19-afe7-b5fa-964eabf31ace@orcon.net.nz> (Phil Sainty's message of "Wed, 23 Oct 2019 07:38:06 +1300") Message-ID: <87v9sg0wtq.fsf@web.de> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:yvzJzB3mL7kTeWsXfp/hrOTplTgrhSiRm5nVZV2qQBw5AjaiTna JVgXr0iZa9UVN+qq3pLmpO9un+tWycvGVx2RKMG0kQ0fcgpDcMg4tPZILsAGUyO6kka5KnI CFHGtFaFZr/4GxL3wKBS7dhwTTXPUBn0vp/nbukO1otvCvRESYtrD3n4nhogqjDtrvNkhGI O2gM04mO9ql8UzCZwnNow== X-Spam-Flag: NO X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:DviXOcZ8tRU=:9c8sZU/YYMvIUMP42LwAzK P4pv5N5SvYNbgAmY+TC0AcTH34Fqlgs0wcRIe0+5PmL/2k1TczBZX4aO5MYQ+PzAc97LMJc7/ L5dgP5SNK7fwmYFFCp7oULFCffTxL5odg9RDh/ZZYtEpNpPkOue9+5BAjFsj3suOA2fatxE8z WgXZVgDz93ogZf3sJhvTxTk2gH18lH6HCdMfChVAIJmCyUYm06Ek/dgIWRGPbFVezp43VGAwX 7mZBga8RtG0ICVCd/bCFSDsqYQcddYSiYPO+S9d1UzV4fdcUAKSPTPi+5b+nWBsLc4QZTrSz3 djk51s7sTpVeCt9hSU2KOyukvELgf8jHNDe01a7UkdJ/wCqIvL1hYx1FTiyUoJaMEtNu0uRjj zu4bgMmVyol3RlbAHeoLcoZJ4DHkzbQgbJusKEHNni/TUYRVdCyvYEMEVLe8rnpmfHWlfEy+b hI0G3GmKAH7MrxVErjDx6IuzDR6Xk4yslB5hWMQlnFoqBzWOXJKQseP08SO/FEu+iXIsWymZN Cu4KvhERpLxh5ussNAxIqSYyNUh3px0jGM5Su15MTf4pFh/7t1wjRQMCOu2UjvwyvaaSGsB97 7csOvBX4vCw2iNeB4o+95Xj8zle5mSdF80g7CtzYd0mk4SeEz3GJaG706Gl81QOAah5/JQRku WkjgGtoYBvl9xuR6DJuEzsyhepbIIINot96RejzHAPPByw/2x5X42saFGTGqgYiaQ2stsC2TX jd9FEnTHCiV5kzPqWtzAlt2Afo73T2NwAJO9mEU3/nIENyxKOT0jQl4Hwg8SfyyeD1CnpNqpJ TGah69hGKg4yl5EMDdUAMp4InT5Qld0d9bvHvWbfvI/fvtHd8uyOPxhFkwtMmilwe1t+wZCY+ RRFtg5RHO2ieQmvxxohB61kz980y9JaxRxpl0Ulr3BTAerOnMMGgNNMFUMCsk6UzKf5sRD1+L ZXX9ymAsXngb1JhKi5+3A5LT3SEaK9DfhnrYgrunELdrF3ez1j0rEBJnYBDoMhQnfP7kvTOnU /XXZObpbQ0EaemIDKQK7aWqMNbLL22Qkn45w7mIYEKVyMIT0+KVFgzhQ227HhWhza0zZFzhU1 NFtNNpIkAnvzPny5H1iegDVdKwSlpO/f2i9/Bjtc6sF/laNYLAx+AI6Ypd54DfLaqk0jUQZ4D OyC6IrO2d+ICK/kiYfZTtQpY3r2iXraRwAKQGr+51EFiQJ7cnjsuduwyUFoQHJmhbG3aIEJ7R V3/YftanddhqL+ggmUQ4Oxxk9Z/aS+lBxW4N42Ky4W4413MM+2oy0pPopQsQ= X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-) Phil Sainty writes: > I just noticed that `run-with-timer' is not mentioned anywhere > in the elisp manual. > > (elisp)Timers even mentions `run-with-idle-timer', which also has > its own node at (elisp)Idle Timers; however `run-with-timer' is > not pointed out. It mentions `run-at-time' which is ... quite the same? I share your confusion: seems the commands `run-at-time' and `run-with-timer' can be merged and one can be made an alias for the other. Michael. From unknown Fri Jun 13 11:39:49 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#37875: 27.0.50; `run-with-timer' not documented in (elisp)Timers Resent-From: Lars Ingebrigtsen Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2019 15:56:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 37875 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Michael Heerdegen Cc: Phil Sainty , 37875@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 37875-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B37875.157227811011003 (code B ref 37875); Mon, 28 Oct 2019 15:56:01 +0000 Received: (at 37875) by debbugs.gnu.org; 28 Oct 2019 15:55:10 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:46252 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iP7ML-0002rP-Ow for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 28 Oct 2019 11:55:10 -0400 Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.231.51]:42400) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iP7MJ-0002rE-Lw for 37875@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 28 Oct 2019 11:55:08 -0400 Received: from cm-84.212.202.86.getinternet.no ([84.212.202.86] helo=marnie) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iP7MF-0000oF-9R; Mon, 28 Oct 2019 16:55:05 +0100 From: Lars Ingebrigtsen References: <7a3175eb-dc19-afe7-b5fa-964eabf31ace@orcon.net.nz> <87v9sg0wtq.fsf@web.de> Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2019 16:55:02 +0100 In-Reply-To: <87v9sg0wtq.fsf@web.de> (Michael Heerdegen's message of "Wed, 23 Oct 2019 09:01:37 +0200") Message-ID: <87o8y0986h.fsf@gnus.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "quimby.gnus.org", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see @@CONTACT_ADDRESS@@ for details. Content preview: Michael Heerdegen writes: > Phil Sainty writes: > >> I just noticed that `run-with-timer' is not mentioned anywhere >> in the elisp manual. >> >> (elisp)Timers even mentions `run-with-idle-timer', which [...] Content analysis details: (-2.9 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Michael Heerdegen writes: > Phil Sainty writes: > >> I just noticed that `run-with-timer' is not mentioned anywhere >> in the elisp manual. >> >> (elisp)Timers even mentions `run-with-idle-timer', which also has >> its own node at (elisp)Idle Timers; however `run-with-timer' is >> not pointed out. > > It mentions `run-at-time' which is ... quite the same? I share your > confusion: seems the commands `run-at-time' and `run-with-timer' can be > merged and one can be made an alias for the other. The definition is: (defun run-with-timer (secs repeat function &rest args) [...] (apply 'run-at-time secs repeat function args)) So that's a kinda strange function to have? It's used about 50 places in the in-tree code; run-at-time is used about 80 places. run-at-time has a better name, I think, but run-with-timer has a name that's analogous to run-with-idle-timer. Does anybody know why run-with-timer was added? I think we should obsolete one or the other, and I think run-at-time has the best name. -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no From unknown Fri Jun 13 11:39:49 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#37875: 27.0.50; `run-with-timer' not documented in (elisp)Timers Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2019 17:02:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 37875 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Lars Ingebrigtsen Cc: michael_heerdegen@web.de, psainty@orcon.net.nz, 37875@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 37875-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B37875.157228207626084 (code B ref 37875); Mon, 28 Oct 2019 17:02:01 +0000 Received: (at 37875) by debbugs.gnu.org; 28 Oct 2019 17:01:16 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:46299 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iP8OK-0006me-GI for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 28 Oct 2019 13:01:16 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:36166) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iP8OH-0006mM-QZ for 37875@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 28 Oct 2019 13:01:14 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:50086) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iP8O9-0007y4-5e; Mon, 28 Oct 2019 13:01:06 -0400 Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=2401 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1iP8O8-0006IL-Am; Mon, 28 Oct 2019 13:01:05 -0400 Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2019 19:00:57 +0200 Message-Id: <831ruwst2u.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii In-reply-to: <87o8y0986h.fsf@gnus.org> (message from Lars Ingebrigtsen on Mon, 28 Oct 2019 16:55:02 +0100) References: <7a3175eb-dc19-afe7-b5fa-964eabf31ace@orcon.net.nz> <87v9sg0wtq.fsf@web.de> <87o8y0986h.fsf@gnus.org> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > From: Lars Ingebrigtsen > Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2019 16:55:02 +0100 > Cc: Phil Sainty , 37875@debbugs.gnu.org > > Does anybody know why run-with-timer was added? I think we should > obsolete one or the other, and I think run-at-time has the best name. $ fgrep run-with-timer lisp/ChangeLog.* lisp/ChangeLog.17:15268: (desktop-auto-save-set-timer): Replace `run-with-timer' with lisp/ChangeLog.6:2135: (run-with-timer): Just call run-at-time. lisp/ChangeLog.6:2797: * timer.el (run-with-timer): Set repetition interval. lisp/ChangeLog.6:2925: (run-with-timer): Renamed from run-after-delay. lisp/ChangeLog.6:2926: (run-at-time, run-with-timer): Return the timer. $ fgrep run-after-delay lisp/ChangeLog.* lisp/ChangeLog.6:2935: (run-after-delay): New function. And if you look up the last match, you will see that run-after-delay was added on the same day timer.el got rewritten using the internal timers (before that -- oh horror! -- it worked by running an external program which delivered a signal to Emacs when the time came). Does that answer your question? (I don't really understand what would we gain by obsoleting such a popular function.) From unknown Fri Jun 13 11:39:49 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#37875: 27.0.50; `run-with-timer' not documented in (elisp)Timers Resent-From: Lars Ingebrigtsen Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2019 11:21:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 37875 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: michael_heerdegen@web.de, psainty@orcon.net.nz, 37875@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 37875-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B37875.157234804515239 (code B ref 37875); Tue, 29 Oct 2019 11:21:02 +0000 Received: (at 37875) by debbugs.gnu.org; 29 Oct 2019 11:20:45 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:46950 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iPPYL-0003xj-2z for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 07:20:45 -0400 Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.231.51]:54926) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iPPYJ-0003xX-Fe for 37875@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 07:20:43 -0400 Received: from cm-84.212.202.86.getinternet.no ([84.212.202.86] helo=marnie) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iPPYF-0007rG-0F; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 12:20:41 +0100 From: Lars Ingebrigtsen References: <7a3175eb-dc19-afe7-b5fa-964eabf31ace@orcon.net.nz> <87v9sg0wtq.fsf@web.de> <87o8y0986h.fsf@gnus.org> <831ruwst2u.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2019 12:20:38 +0100 In-Reply-To: <831ruwst2u.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Mon, 28 Oct 2019 19:00:57 +0200") Message-ID: <87wocn23y1.fsf@gnus.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "quimby.gnus.org", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see @@CONTACT_ADDRESS@@ for details. Content preview: Eli Zaretskii writes: > And if you look up the last match, you will see that run-after-delay > was added on the same day timer.el got rewritten using the internal > timers (before that -- oh horror! -- it worked by running [...] Content analysis details: (-2.9 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Eli Zaretskii writes: > And if you look up the last match, you will see that run-after-delay > was added on the same day timer.el got rewritten using the internal > timers (before that -- oh horror! -- it worked by running an external > program which delivered a signal to Emacs when the time came). Geez. > Does that answer your question? Not really -- I wondered why there were two functions (run-with-timer and run-at-time) that are identical. > (I don't really understand what would we gain by obsoleting such a > popular function.) It could be made into a defalias at least -- the run-at-time doc string is much better than the run-with-timer one. -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no From unknown Fri Jun 13 11:39:49 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#37875: 27.0.50; `run-with-timer' not documented in (elisp)Timers Resent-From: Phil Sainty Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2019 11:35:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 37875 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Lars Ingebrigtsen , Eli Zaretskii Cc: michael_heerdegen@web.de, 37875@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 37875-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B37875.157234887924299 (code B ref 37875); Tue, 29 Oct 2019 11:35:02 +0000 Received: (at 37875) by debbugs.gnu.org; 29 Oct 2019 11:34:39 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:46963 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iPPln-0006Jr-0u for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 07:34:39 -0400 Received: from smtp-2.orcon.net.nz ([60.234.4.43]:58703) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iPPlj-0006Jh-UX for 37875@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 07:34:37 -0400 Received: from [116.251.203.173] (port=39130 helo=[192.168.20.103]) by smtp-2.orcon.net.nz with esmtpa (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iPPlg-0006Gv-GW; Wed, 30 Oct 2019 00:34:32 +1300 References: <7a3175eb-dc19-afe7-b5fa-964eabf31ace@orcon.net.nz> <87v9sg0wtq.fsf@web.de> <87o8y0986h.fsf@gnus.org> <831ruwst2u.fsf@gnu.org> <87wocn23y1.fsf@gnus.org> From: Phil Sainty Message-ID: <2d52039c-5ba3-0ac5-b514-8e3bf00a6aad@orcon.net.nz> Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2019 00:34:33 +1300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87wocn23y1.fsf@gnus.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-GB Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-GeoIP: NZ X-Spam_score: -2.9 X-Spam_score_int: -28 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-) On 30/10/19 12:20 AM, Lars Ingebrigtsen wrote: > Not really -- I wondered why there were two functions (run-with-timer > and run-at-time) that are identical. > > It could be made into a defalias at least -- the run-at-time doc string > is much better than the run-with-timer one. I think the point is this: (run-with-idle-timer SECS REPEAT FUNCTION &rest ARGS) (run-with-timer SECS REPEAT FUNCTION &rest ARGS) (run-at-time TIME REPEAT FUNCTION &rest ARGS) `run-with-timer' is the non-idle analog of `run-with-idle-timer', with a documented expectation that one passes it a number of seconds as its first argument SECS, being the timeout to use. So if I see either `run-with-timer' or `run-with-idle-timer' then I know I'm looking at a timeout argument in seconds. `run-with-time' has a different argument, TIME, which *may* be a number of seconds (and therefore `run-with-timer' can be defined in terms of this); but ostensibly it's a more general function. I'd argue for keeping them both. If anything, I'd be inclined to add validation to `run-with-timer' to check that an integer was passed. -Phil From unknown Fri Jun 13 11:39:49 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#37875: 27.0.50; `run-with-timer' not documented in (elisp)Timers Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2019 12:32:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 37875 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Lars Ingebrigtsen Cc: michael_heerdegen@web.de, psainty@orcon.net.nz, 37875@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 37875-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B37875.157235232129802 (code B ref 37875); Tue, 29 Oct 2019 12:32:02 +0000 Received: (at 37875) by debbugs.gnu.org; 29 Oct 2019 12:32:01 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47002 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iPQfJ-0007kY-7q for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 08:32:01 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:37694) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iPQfG-0007kL-JI for 37875@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 08:31:59 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:38499) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iPQfA-0003Kb-P1; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 08:31:52 -0400 Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=1713 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1iPQf8-0005tX-9H; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 08:31:51 -0400 Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2019 14:31:46 +0200 Message-Id: <83pnifpwb1.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii In-reply-to: <87wocn23y1.fsf@gnus.org> (message from Lars Ingebrigtsen on Tue, 29 Oct 2019 12:20:38 +0100) References: <7a3175eb-dc19-afe7-b5fa-964eabf31ace@orcon.net.nz> <87v9sg0wtq.fsf@web.de> <87o8y0986h.fsf@gnus.org> <831ruwst2u.fsf@gnu.org> <87wocn23y1.fsf@gnus.org> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > From: Lars Ingebrigtsen > Cc: michael_heerdegen@web.de, psainty@orcon.net.nz, 37875@debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2019 12:20:38 +0100 > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > > And if you look up the last match, you will see that run-after-delay > > was added on the same day timer.el got rewritten using the internal > > timers (before that -- oh horror! -- it worked by running an external > > program which delivered a signal to Emacs when the time came). > > Geez. Yeah. > > Does that answer your question? > > Not really -- I wondered why there were two functions (run-with-timer > and run-at-time) that are identical. Because they aren't identical, see Phil's response. run-after-delay was just that: it would run the function after a delay of SECS, and that argument isn't supposed to be anything but a number of seconds to wait from NOW. From unknown Fri Jun 13 11:39:49 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#37875: 27.0.50; `run-with-timer' not documented in (elisp)Timers Resent-From: Lars Ingebrigtsen Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2019 12:38:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 37875 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: michael_heerdegen@web.de, psainty@orcon.net.nz, 37875@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 37875-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B37875.157235263530280 (code B ref 37875); Tue, 29 Oct 2019 12:38:02 +0000 Received: (at 37875) by debbugs.gnu.org; 29 Oct 2019 12:37:15 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47006 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iPQkM-0007sK-UL for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 08:37:15 -0400 Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.231.51]:55848) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iPQkL-0007sC-1G for 37875@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 08:37:14 -0400 Received: from cm-84.212.202.86.getinternet.no ([84.212.202.86] helo=marnie) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iPQkG-0000gO-P9; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 13:37:11 +0100 From: Lars Ingebrigtsen References: <7a3175eb-dc19-afe7-b5fa-964eabf31ace@orcon.net.nz> <87v9sg0wtq.fsf@web.de> <87o8y0986h.fsf@gnus.org> <831ruwst2u.fsf@gnu.org> <87wocn23y1.fsf@gnus.org> <83pnifpwb1.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2019 13:37:08 +0100 In-Reply-To: <83pnifpwb1.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Tue, 29 Oct 2019 14:31:46 +0200") Message-ID: <871ruv20ej.fsf@gnus.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "quimby.gnus.org", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see @@CONTACT_ADDRESS@@ for details. Content preview: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> Not really -- I wondered why there were two functions (run-with-timer >> and run-at-time) that are identical. > > Because they aren't identical, see Phil's response. run-after-delay > was just that [...] Content analysis details: (-2.9 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Eli Zaretskii writes: >> Not really -- I wondered why there were two functions (run-with-timer >> and run-at-time) that are identical. > > Because they aren't identical, see Phil's response. run-after-delay > was just that: it would run the function after a delay of SECS, and > that argument isn't supposed to be anything but a number of seconds to > wait from NOW. I grepped through the tree -- people seem to use the two functions interchangeably (i.e., there are calls to run-with-timer with a t value for SECS etc). But, OK, if you want to have two functions that are identical (only differing in the doc string), then both functions should be documented in the lispref manual. -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no From unknown Fri Jun 13 11:39:49 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#37875: 27.0.50; `run-with-timer' not documented in (elisp)Timers Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2019 12:42:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 37875 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Lars Ingebrigtsen Cc: michael_heerdegen@web.de, psainty@orcon.net.nz, 37875@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 37875-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B37875.157235288030675 (code B ref 37875); Tue, 29 Oct 2019 12:42:01 +0000 Received: (at 37875) by debbugs.gnu.org; 29 Oct 2019 12:41:20 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47010 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iPQoK-0007yh-GD for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 08:41:20 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:38653) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iPQoI-0007yT-Ei for 37875@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 08:41:19 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:38576) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iPQoC-0005xX-OA; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 08:41:12 -0400 Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=2288 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1iPQoC-0000P3-2j; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 08:41:12 -0400 Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2019 14:41:06 +0200 Message-Id: <83o8xzpvvh.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii In-reply-to: <871ruv20ej.fsf@gnus.org> (message from Lars Ingebrigtsen on Tue, 29 Oct 2019 13:37:08 +0100) References: <7a3175eb-dc19-afe7-b5fa-964eabf31ace@orcon.net.nz> <87v9sg0wtq.fsf@web.de> <87o8y0986h.fsf@gnus.org> <831ruwst2u.fsf@gnu.org> <87wocn23y1.fsf@gnus.org> <83pnifpwb1.fsf@gnu.org> <871ruv20ej.fsf@gnus.org> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > From: Lars Ingebrigtsen > Cc: michael_heerdegen@web.de, psainty@orcon.net.nz, 37875@debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2019 13:37:08 +0100 > > But, OK, if you want to have two functions that are identical (only > differing in the doc string), then both functions should be documented > in the lispref manual. No objections from me. From unknown Fri Jun 13 11:39:49 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#37875: 27.0.50; `run-with-timer' not documented in (elisp)Timers Resent-From: Lars Ingebrigtsen Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2019 21:23:03 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 37875 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: michael_heerdegen@web.de, psainty@orcon.net.nz, 37875@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 37875-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B37875.157238416410238 (code B ref 37875); Tue, 29 Oct 2019 21:23:03 +0000 Received: (at 37875) by debbugs.gnu.org; 29 Oct 2019 21:22:44 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48683 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iPYwu-0002f4-1N for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 17:22:44 -0400 Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.231.51]:44708) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iPYwr-0002es-Fj for 37875@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 17:22:42 -0400 Received: from cm-84.212.202.86.getinternet.no ([84.212.202.86] helo=marnie) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iPYwn-0001Wt-4c; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 22:22:39 +0100 From: Lars Ingebrigtsen References: <7a3175eb-dc19-afe7-b5fa-964eabf31ace@orcon.net.nz> <87v9sg0wtq.fsf@web.de> <87o8y0986h.fsf@gnus.org> <831ruwst2u.fsf@gnu.org> <87wocn23y1.fsf@gnus.org> <83pnifpwb1.fsf@gnu.org> <871ruv20ej.fsf@gnus.org> <83o8xzpvvh.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2019 22:22:36 +0100 In-Reply-To: <83o8xzpvvh.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Tue, 29 Oct 2019 14:41:06 +0200") Message-ID: <87eeyvz1pf.fsf@gnus.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "quimby.gnus.org", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see @@CONTACT_ADDRESS@@ for details. Content preview: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> But, OK, if you want to have two functions that are identical (only >> differing in the doc string), then both functions should be documented >> in the lispref manual. > > No objections from me. Content analysis details: (-2.9 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Eli Zaretskii writes: >> But, OK, if you want to have two functions that are identical (only >> differing in the doc string), then both functions should be documented >> in the lispref manual. > > No objections from me. OK; done. -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Oct 29 17:22:54 2019 Received: (at control) by debbugs.gnu.org; 29 Oct 2019 21:22:55 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48686 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iPYx4-0002fV-CT for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 17:22:54 -0400 Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.231.51]:44740) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iPYx1-0002fM-VH for control@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 17:22:52 -0400 Received: from cm-84.212.202.86.getinternet.no ([84.212.202.86] helo=marnie) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iPYwz-0001X8-7q for control@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 22:22:51 +0100 Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2019 22:22:48 +0100 Message-Id: <87d0efz1p3.fsf@gnus.org> To: control@debbugs.gnu.org From: Lars Ingebrigtsen Subject: control message for bug #37875 X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "quimby.gnus.org", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see @@CONTACT_ADDRESS@@ for details. Content preview: tags 37875 fixed close 37875 27.1 quit Content analysis details: (-2.9 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: control X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) tags 37875 fixed close 37875 27.1 quit