GNU bug report logs - #5924
23.1; accept-process-output switching current-buffer

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Uday S Reddy <u.s.reddy <at> cs.bham.ac.uk>
To: Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
Cc: Uday S Reddy <u.s.reddy <at> cs.bham.ac.uk>, 5924 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#5924: 23.1; accept-process-output switching current-buffer
Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2010 13:22:22 +0100

Stefan Monnier writes:

> > Reading the elisp manual doesn't indicate anywhere that a call such as 
> >    (accept-process-output process)
> > should change the current-buffer.
> 
> That depends on the code run during the wait.  I.e. it depends on the
> code run by the process filters, sentinels, timers, ...

Yes, indeed!  If there is code being run during accept-process-output
then the state can be changed by that code.  But in the example that I
witnessed, there was *no code* being run.

Looking at the manual again, it says in "Accepting Output from
Processes":

    "There are *two ways* to receive the output that a subprocess
    writes to its standard output stream.  The output can be inserted
    in a buffer, which is called the associated buffer of the process,
    or a function called the "filter function" can be called to act on
    the output."

In the second "way" that is being talked about, we can reasonably
expect that current-buffer might change during the execution of the
filter function.  But in the first "way", where Emacs is doing all the
work of accepting the process output, I don't think it should change
the current-buffer.  

> We've already fixed several bugs where process filters changed
> current-buffer, but I think we should fix it not in the process filters
> but in the code that run them.  At least, unless someone can come up
> with a scenario where a process filter, sentinel, or timer would need
> to change current-buffer.

I don't fully understand this, but let me say that I am just talking
about problem with the Elisp semantics, not Emacs libraries.  If a
filter function changed the current-buffer, one would regard it as
buggy.  But if Elisp itself changes the current-buffer...?

The other thing that concerns me is that the same behaviour persisted
even if I set the JUST-THIS-ONE flag to t.  In that case, one would
expect that Elisp would ignore the output from all other processes.
So, it should have no reason to change the current-buffer to the other
process.  But it did.  I am not sure if the JUST-THIS-ONE flag is
doing anything at all.

Cheers,
Uday

PS I have been looking at the emacs-developers list lately.  It is
quite amazing how much the guys talk, RMS included!  

Previous Next

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