GNU bug report logs - #44743
native-comp: confirm-exit-emacs warns about active processes when compiling

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 44743 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 44743 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
To: bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
Subject: native-comp: confirm-exit-emacs warns about active processes when
 compiling
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 14:24:44 -0800

Severity: minor

Steps to reproduce, on the native-comp branch:

0. rm -rf ~/.emacs.d/eln-cache
1. emacs -Q
2. C-x C-c
3. Press "y" (I am sure I want to quit)

A prompt is now shown with this text:
"Active processes exist; kill them and exit anyway? (y or n) "

The processes are all native-comp processes.

Expected result: No prompt is shown.  The native-comp processes are
recognized and killed automatically.

Message #8 received at 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Andrea Corallo <akrl <at> sdf.org>
To: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
Cc: 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#44743: native-comp: confirm-exit-emacs warns about active
 processes when compiling
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 08:35:49 +0000

Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se> writes:

> Severity: minor
>
> Steps to reproduce, on the native-comp branch:
>
> 0. rm -rf ~/.emacs.d/eln-cache
> 1. emacs -Q
> 2. C-x C-c
> 3. Press "y" (I am sure I want to quit)
>
> A prompt is now shown with this text:
> "Active processes exist; kill them and exit anyway? (y or n) "
>
> The processes are all native-comp processes.
>
> Expected result: No prompt is shown.  The native-comp processes are
> recognized and killed automatically.

Hi Stefan,

I agree this would be nice to have.

I'm a little underwater ATM as I'm trying to progress on other features,
fill free to pick it up if you feel/like.

Thanks

  Andrea

Message #11 received at 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Andrea Corallo <akrl <at> sdf.org>
Cc: stefan <at> marxist.se, 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#44743: native-comp: confirm-exit-emacs warns about active
 processes when compiling
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 13:35:41 +0200

> Cc: 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 08:35:49 +0000
> From: Andrea Corallo via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs,
>  the Swiss army knife of text editors" <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>
> 
> > 0. rm -rf ~/.emacs.d/eln-cache
> > 1. emacs -Q
> > 2. C-x C-c
> > 3. Press "y" (I am sure I want to quit)
> >
> > A prompt is now shown with this text:
> > "Active processes exist; kill them and exit anyway? (y or n) "
> >
> > The processes are all native-comp processes.
> >
> > Expected result: No prompt is shown.  The native-comp processes are
> > recognized and killed automatically.
> 
> Hi Stefan,
> 
> I agree this would be nice to have.

FWIW, I think this should be controlled by a user option.  It is not
at all obvious that everyone would like compilation processes to be
killed automatically, people might want to wait for them to complete.

Message #14 received at 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>, Andrea Corallo <akrl <at> sdf.org>
Cc: 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#44743: native-comp: confirm-exit-emacs warns about active
 processes when compiling
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2020 11:22:58 -0800

Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:

>> > Expected result: No prompt is shown.  The native-comp processes are
>> > recognized and killed automatically.
>>
>> I agree this would be nice to have.
>
> FWIW, I think this should be controlled by a user option.  It is not
> at all obvious that everyone would like compilation processes to be
> killed automatically, people might want to wait for them to complete.

Compiling in the background should in my opinion work as transparently
as possible.  The fact that we cache compilation results should be
considered an implementation detail.  We don't need to shape our
outwardly behavior by such implementation details.

We could of course support what you suggest.  I'm not against it as an
option.  But I don't think it is very important, and it would take some
time and effort to implement and maintain.  I'm not sure that effort is
well-spent at this point, and would rather leave it for the future.

IOW, I think we should work on reasonable defaults first, and only add
options in later once we are sure that we really need them.

Message #17 received at 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
Cc: 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, akrl <at> sdf.org
Subject: Re: bug#44743: native-comp: confirm-exit-emacs warns about active
 processes when compiling
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2020 21:47:48 +0200

> From: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
> Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2020 11:22:58 -0800
> Cc: 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> 
> > FWIW, I think this should be controlled by a user option.  It is not
> > at all obvious that everyone would like compilation processes to be
> > killed automatically, people might want to wait for them to complete.
> 
> Compiling in the background should in my opinion work as transparently
> as possible.  The fact that we cache compilation results should be
> considered an implementation detail.  We don't need to shape our
> outwardly behavior by such implementation details.

I understand your opinion, but I don't think that's the only opinion
that could exist.  Caching the compiled modules can hardly be regarded
as an implementation detail when compilation takes a tangible amount
of time -- which is why we cache the results in the first place.  IOW,
if compilation is interrupted, Emacs will try to compile it again the
next time, and the code will run slower than expected.  So if this is
an implementation detail, it will be acutely obvious to users, and
they may wish to wait a bit with exiting Emacs to let the compilation
run to the end.  It is not unlike the case where you sent an email
message and want to exit Emacs before the message transmission has
ended.  Users will appreciate a degree of control in these cases.

> We could of course support what you suggest.  I'm not against it as an
> option.  But I don't think it is very important, and it would take some
> time and effort to implement and maintain.  I'm not sure that effort is
> well-spent at this point, and would rather leave it for the future.

I think interrupting compilation also comes with maintenance
head-aches, such as the temporary files left behind, incomplete .eln
files we'd need to clean up, etc.

> IOW, I think we should work on reasonable defaults first, and only add
> options in later once we are sure that we really need them.

I think the argument is about what is "reasonable" here, all the rest
is agreed upon.

Message #20 received at 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Andrea Corallo <akrl <at> sdf.org>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>, 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#44743: native-comp: confirm-exit-emacs warns about active
 processes when compiling
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2020 20:35:03 +0000

Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:

>> From: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
>> Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2020 11:22:58 -0800
>> Cc: 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
>> 
>> > FWIW, I think this should be controlled by a user option.  It is not
>> > at all obvious that everyone would like compilation processes to be
>> > killed automatically, people might want to wait for them to complete.
>> 
>> Compiling in the background should in my opinion work as transparently
>> as possible.  The fact that we cache compilation results should be
>> considered an implementation detail.  We don't need to shape our
>> outwardly behavior by such implementation details.
>
> I understand your opinion, but I don't think that's the only opinion
> that could exist.  Caching the compiled modules can hardly be regarded
> as an implementation detail when compilation takes a tangible amount
> of time -- which is why we cache the results in the first place.  IOW,
> if compilation is interrupted, Emacs will try to compile it again the
> next time, and the code will run slower than expected.  So if this is
> an implementation detail, it will be acutely obvious to users, and
> they may wish to wait a bit with exiting Emacs to let the compilation
> run to the end.  It is not unlike the case where you sent an email
> message and want to exit Emacs before the message transmission has
> ended.  Users will appreciate a degree of control in these cases.
>
>> We could of course support what you suggest.  I'm not against it as an
>> option.  But I don't think it is very important, and it would take some
>> time and effort to implement and maintain.  I'm not sure that effort is
>> well-spent at this point, and would rather leave it for the future.
>
> I think interrupting compilation also comes with maintenance
> head-aches, such as the temporary files left behind, incomplete .eln
> files we'd need to clean up, etc.
>
>> IOW, I think we should work on reasonable defaults first, and only add
>> options in later once we are sure that we really need them.
>
> I think the argument is about what is "reasonable" here, all the rest
> is agreed upon.

I also think this option should be controlled by a customize.

I can picture most "power users" legitimately willing to be informed of
these processes being killed if present at exit.  OTOH I guess the
majority of non "power users" would like just to close Emacs
transparently.

Because of this my idea I think I'm for the transparent behavior as
default.

  Andrea

Message #23 received at 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, stefan <at> marxist.se, Andrea Corallo <akrl <at> sdf.org>
Subject: Re: bug#44743: native-comp: confirm-exit-emacs warns about active
 processes when compiling
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 08:52:18 +0100

Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:

> FWIW, I think this should be controlled by a user option.  It is not
> at all obvious that everyone would like compilation processes to be
> killed automatically, people might want to wait for them to complete.

Since this is something that Emacs does automatically, in the
background, I don't think a user option sounds like something somebody
would want to tweak.  If somebody has a use case for that, it can be
added later.

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no

Message #26 received at 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>
Cc: 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, stefan <at> marxist.se, akrl <at> sdf.org
Subject: Re: bug#44743: native-comp: confirm-exit-emacs warns about active
 processes when compiling
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 17:42:40 +0200

> From: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>
> Cc: Andrea Corallo <akrl <at> sdf.org>,  stefan <at> marxist.se,  44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 08:52:18 +0100
> 
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:
> 
> > FWIW, I think this should be controlled by a user option.  It is not
> > at all obvious that everyone would like compilation processes to be
> > killed automatically, people might want to wait for them to complete.
> 
> Since this is something that Emacs does automatically, in the
> background, I don't think a user option sounds like something somebody
> would want to tweak.

IMO, we should offer an option precisely _because_ this is in
background, thus the user could be unaware of the compilation being
run.  Since compilation takes non-negligible time, I envision users
who'd like to wait for a few moments if that gave them faster Lisp
next time.

This is not unlike background subprocesses about which we do ask on
exit.

Message #29 received at 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>, Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>
Cc: 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, akrl <at> sdf.org
Subject: Re: bug#44743: native-comp: confirm-exit-emacs warns about active
 processes when compiling
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 08:08:15 -0800

Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:

>> From: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>
>> Cc: Andrea Corallo <akrl <at> sdf.org>,  stefan <at> marxist.se,  44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
>> Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 08:52:18 +0100
>>
>> Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:
>>
>> > FWIW, I think this should be controlled by a user option.  It is not
>> > at all obvious that everyone would like compilation processes to be
>> > killed automatically, people might want to wait for them to complete.
>>
>> Since this is something that Emacs does automatically, in the
>> background, I don't think a user option sounds like something somebody
>> would want to tweak.
>
> IMO, we should offer an option precisely _because_ this is in
> background, thus the user could be unaware of the compilation being
> run.  Since compilation takes non-negligible time, I envision users
> who'd like to wait for a few moments if that gave them faster Lisp
> next time.
>
> This is not unlike background subprocesses about which we do ask on
> exit.

IIUC, it's different from other background processes.  The compilation
will resume automatically the next time that file is loaded in
subsequent invocations of Emacs.

Message #32 received at 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Andrea Corallo <akrl <at> sdf.org>
To: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>, Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>,
 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#44743: native-comp: confirm-exit-emacs warns about active
 processes when compiling
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 16:29:58 +0000

Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se> writes:

> Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:
>
>>> From: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>
>>> Cc: Andrea Corallo <akrl <at> sdf.org>,  stefan <at> marxist.se,  44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
>>> Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 08:52:18 +0100
>>>
>>> Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:
>>>
>>> > FWIW, I think this should be controlled by a user option.  It is not
>>> > at all obvious that everyone would like compilation processes to be
>>> > killed automatically, people might want to wait for them to complete.
>>>
>>> Since this is something that Emacs does automatically, in the
>>> background, I don't think a user option sounds like something somebody
>>> would want to tweak.
>>
>> IMO, we should offer an option precisely _because_ this is in
>> background, thus the user could be unaware of the compilation being
>> run.  Since compilation takes non-negligible time, I envision users
>> who'd like to wait for a few moments if that gave them faster Lisp
>> next time.
>>
>> This is not unlike background subprocesses about which we do ask on
>> exit.
>
> IIUC, it's different from other background processes.  The compilation
> will resume automatically the next time that file is loaded in
> subsequent invocations of Emacs.

Yes but you will loose the machine time invested into the compilation
that was aborted :) I guess 99% of people wouldn't care about it but
OTOH what's the downside of leaving a customize to control it?

  Andrea

Message #35 received at 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
Cc: larsi <at> gnus.org, 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, akrl <at> sdf.org
Subject: Re: bug#44743: native-comp: confirm-exit-emacs warns about active
 processes when compiling
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 18:36:27 +0200

> From: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
> Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 08:08:15 -0800
> Cc: akrl <at> sdf.org, 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> 
> The compilation will resume automatically the next time that file is
> loaded in subsequent invocations of Emacs.

Resume, and take how much time?  Not every user out there has a
16-core i9 at his/her disposal.

Message #38 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Andrea Corallo <akrl <at> sdf.org>
To: Andrea Corallo via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of
 text editors" <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>
Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>, Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>,
 Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>, 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#44743: native-comp: confirm-exit-emacs warns about active
 processes when compiling
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2021 22:51:00 +0000

Hi all,

IIUC this bug is "just" about deciding what's the best default behavior
regarding requiring confirmation or not for killing running async
compile processes when exiting Emacs.

As my understanding is that Eli's preference is matching the current
implementation (requiring it) I'm wondering if we can close this bug.

Thanks

  Andrea

Message #44 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
To: Andrea Corallo <akrl <at> sdf.org>, 
 "Andrea Corallo via Bug reports for GNU Emacs,
 the Swiss army knife of text editors" <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>
Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>, Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>,
 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#44743: native-comp: confirm-exit-emacs warns about active
 processes when compiling
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2021 18:45:08 -0600

Andrea Corallo <akrl <at> sdf.org> writes:

> IIUC this bug is "just" about deciding what's the best default behavior
> regarding requiring confirmation or not for killing running async
> compile processes when exiting Emacs.
>
> As my understanding is that Eli's preference is matching the current
> implementation (requiring it) I'm wondering if we can close this bug.

FWIW, I agree with your previous assessment that transparency by default
is the best choice here.

Ideally, nativecomp would not change how Emacs works in any user visible
way (besides better performance).  But in practice, due to the way this
all works, there will necessarily have to be at least some differences.

The user visible change in behavior we discuss here is not necessary,
AFAIU, but completely avoidable.  It feels to me like we leave our guts
hanging out on purpose.

Message #50 received at 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Andrea Corallo <akrl <at> sdf.org>
Cc: larsi <at> gnus.org, stefan <at> marxist.se, 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#44743: native-comp: confirm-exit-emacs warns about active
 processes when compiling
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2021 09:05:48 +0200

> From: Andrea Corallo <akrl <at> sdf.org>
> Cc: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>, Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>,
>         Lars
>  Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>, 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2021 22:51:00 +0000
> 
> IIUC this bug is "just" about deciding what's the best default behavior
> regarding requiring confirmation or not for killing running async
> compile processes when exiting Emacs.

Yes, mostly.

> As my understanding is that Eli's preference is matching the current
> implementation (requiring it) I'm wondering if we can close this bug.

It is fine with me to close the bug and leave this for later, when the
branch is merged, and we have more user experience.  We could reopen
the bug at that time.

A better solution, from my POV, given the controversy, is to provide a
defcustom for this, and then I'm okay with making silently killing the
compilation the default.  I thought it would leave everyone happy.
For some reason, Lars and Stefan are against even that, so I hesitate
to even ask you, Andrea, to add such a defcustom if you have time.

Message #53 received at 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>, Andrea Corallo <akrl <at> sdf.org>
Cc: larsi <at> gnus.org, 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#44743: native-comp: confirm-exit-emacs warns about active
 processes when compiling
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2021 05:02:34 -0800

Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:

> A better solution, from my POV, given the controversy, is to provide a
> defcustom for this, and then I'm okay with making silently killing the
> compilation the default.  I thought it would leave everyone happy.

Sounds good to me.

Message #58 received at 44743-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Andrea Corallo <akrl <at> sdf.org>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 44743-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org, larsi <at> gnus.org, stefan <at> marxist.se
Subject: Re: bug#44743: native-comp: confirm-exit-emacs warns about active
 processes when compiling
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2021 13:44:47 +0000

Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:

Q>> From: Andrea Corallo <akrl <at> sdf.org>
>> Cc: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>, Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>,
>>         Lars
>>  Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>, 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
>> Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2021 22:51:00 +0000
>> 
>> IIUC this bug is "just" about deciding what's the best default behavior
>> regarding requiring confirmation or not for killing running async
>> compile processes when exiting Emacs.
>
> Yes, mostly.
>
>> As my understanding is that Eli's preference is matching the current
>> implementation (requiring it) I'm wondering if we can close this bug.
>
> It is fine with me to close the bug and leave this for later, when the
> branch is merged, and we have more user experience.  We could reopen
> the bug at that time.
>
> A better solution, from my POV, given the controversy, is to provide a
> defcustom for this, and then I'm okay with making silently killing the
> compilation the default.  I thought it would leave everyone happy.
> For some reason, Lars and Stefan are against even that, so I hesitate
> to even ask you, Andrea, to add such a defcustom if you have time.

I also agree the customize look like the best option, 54df918ad1 adds
`comp-async-query-on-exit' setting it to nil as default.

Please have a look to the docstring I've added and let me know in case
needs improvent, my docstring skills are worst than my coding one's.

Closing the bug in the meanwhile.

Thanks

  Andrea

Message #61 received at 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Andrea Corallo <akrl <at> sdf.org>
Cc: larsi <at> gnus.org, stefan <at> marxist.se, 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#44743: native-comp: confirm-exit-emacs warns about active
 processes when compiling
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2021 16:12:01 +0200

> From: Andrea Corallo <akrl <at> sdf.org>
> Cc: stefan <at> marxist.se, larsi <at> gnus.org, 44743-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2021 13:44:47 +0000
> 
> > A better solution, from my POV, given the controversy, is to provide a
> > defcustom for this, and then I'm okay with making silently killing the
> > compilation the default.  I thought it would leave everyone happy.
> > For some reason, Lars and Stefan are against even that, so I hesitate
> > to even ask you, Andrea, to add such a defcustom if you have time.
> 
> I also agree the customize look like the best option, 54df918ad1 adds
> `comp-async-query-on-exit' setting it to nil as default.

Thanks.

> Please have a look to the docstring I've added and let me know in case
> needs improvent, my docstring skills are worst than my coding one's.

Thanks, I've made some changes there.

Btw, all the defcustom's in comp.el will need to have the :version
tag.  But we can leave this for later.

Message #64 received at 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Andrea Corallo <akrl <at> sdf.org>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: larsi <at> gnus.org, stefan <at> marxist.se, 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#44743: native-comp: confirm-exit-emacs warns about active
 processes when compiling
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2021 14:28:34 +0000

Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:

>> From: Andrea Corallo <akrl <at> sdf.org>
>> Cc: stefan <at> marxist.se, larsi <at> gnus.org, 44743-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
>> Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2021 13:44:47 +0000
>> 
>> > A better solution, from my POV, given the controversy, is to provide a
>> > defcustom for this, and then I'm okay with making silently killing the
>> > compilation the default.  I thought it would leave everyone happy.
>> > For some reason, Lars and Stefan are against even that, so I hesitate
>> > to even ask you, Andrea, to add such a defcustom if you have time.
>> 
>> I also agree the customize look like the best option, 54df918ad1 adds
>> `comp-async-query-on-exit' setting it to nil as default.
>
> Thanks.
>
>> Please have a look to the docstring I've added and let me know in case
>> needs improvent, my docstring skills are worst than my coding one's.
>
> Thanks, I've made some changes there.

Appreciated

> Btw, all the defcustom's in comp.el will need to have the :version
> tag.  But we can leave this for later.

Okay

Thanks

  Andrea

Message #67 received at 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
To: Andrea Corallo <akrl <at> sdf.org>, Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: larsi <at> gnus.org, 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#44743: native-comp: confirm-exit-emacs warns about active
 processes when compiling
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2021 11:26:15 -0600

Andrea Corallo <akrl <at> sdf.org> writes:

>> Btw, all the defcustom's in comp.el will need to have the :version
>> tag.  But we can leave this for later.
>
> Okay

I've tagged them up.

Message #70 received at 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Andrea Corallo <akrl <at> sdf.org>
To: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>, larsi <at> gnus.org, 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#44743: native-comp: confirm-exit-emacs warns about active
 processes when compiling
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2021 18:55:25 +0000

Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se> writes:

> Andrea Corallo <akrl <at> sdf.org> writes:
>
>>> Btw, all the defcustom's in comp.el will need to have the :version
>>> tag.  But we can leave this for later.
>>
>> Okay
>
> I've tagged them up.

Thanks!

Message #73 received at 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
Cc: larsi <at> gnus.org, 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, akrl <at> sdf.org
Subject: Re: bug#44743: native-comp: confirm-exit-emacs warns about active
 processes when compiling
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2021 21:54:23 +0200

> From: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
> Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2021 11:26:15 -0600
> Cc: larsi <at> gnus.org, 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> 
> Andrea Corallo <akrl <at> sdf.org> writes:
> 
> >> Btw, all the defcustom's in comp.el will need to have the :version
> >> tag.  But we can leave this for later.
> >
> > Okay
> 
> I've tagged them up.

Thanks!

Message #76 received at 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Glenn Morris <rgm <at> gnu.org>
To: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>, 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, larsi <at> gnus.org,
 Andrea Corallo <akrl <at> sdf.org>
Subject: Re: bug#44743: native-comp: confirm-exit-emacs warns about active
 processes when compiling
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2021 15:31:55 -0500

>>> Btw, all the defcustom's in comp.el will need to have the :version tag.

> I've tagged them up.

Since the whole file is new, you could just tag the defgroup.

Message #79 received at 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
To: Glenn Morris <rgm <at> gnu.org>
Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>, 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, larsi <at> gnus.org,
 Andrea Corallo <akrl <at> sdf.org>
Subject: Re: bug#44743: native-comp: confirm-exit-emacs warns about active
 processes when compiling
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2021 20:14:30 -0600

Glenn Morris <rgm <at> gnu.org> writes:

>>>> Btw, all the defcustom's in comp.el will need to have the :version tag.
>
>> I've tagged them up.
>
> Since the whole file is new, you could just tag the defgroup.

Thanks.  Will that propagate to the individual options?

This seems not to give the "This variable was introduced" message:

    (progn (defgroup foo nil "foo" :version "28.1")
           (defcustom bar nil "foo" :group 'foo)
           (describe-variable 'bar))

Do we care to have that message?

Message #82 received at 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
Cc: rgm <at> gnu.org, larsi <at> gnus.org, 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, akrl <at> sdf.org
Subject: Re: bug#44743: native-comp: confirm-exit-emacs warns about active
 processes when compiling
Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2021 09:23:28 +0200

> From: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
> Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2021 20:14:30 -0600
> Cc: Andrea Corallo <akrl <at> sdf.org>, Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>, 44743 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, larsi <at> gnus.org
> 
> > Since the whole file is new, you could just tag the defgroup.
> 
> Thanks.  Will that propagate to the individual options?
> 
> This seems not to give the "This variable was introduced" message:
> 
>     (progn (defgroup foo nil "foo" :version "28.1")
>            (defcustom bar nil "foo" :group 'foo)
>            (describe-variable 'bar))
> 
> Do we care to have that message?

I think we do, otherwise why have it?

Previous Next

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