GNU bug report logs - #61954
30.0.50; [PATCH] Simplify structured commands in Eshell

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: help-debbugs <at> gnu.org (GNU bug Tracking System)
To: Jim Porter <jporterbugs <at> gmail.com>
Subject: bug#61954: closed (Re: bug#61954: 30.0.50; [PATCH] Simplify
 structured commands in Eshell)
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2023 05:34:02 +0000

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

Your bug report

#61954: 30.0.50; [PATCH] Simplify structured commands in Eshell

which was filed against the emacs package, has been closed.

The explanation is attached below, along with your original report.
If you require more details, please reply to 61954 <at> debbugs.gnu.org.

-- 
61954: https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=61954
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs <at> gnu.org with problems

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

From: Jim Porter <jporterbugs <at> gmail.com>
To: 61954-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#61954: 30.0.50; [PATCH] Simplify structured commands in Eshell
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2023 22:33:09 -0700

On 3/3/2023 11:28 PM, Jim Porter wrote:
> Structured commands are just Eshell flow control commands, like 'if' and 
> 'while'. These expected you to set 'eshell-test-body' and 
> 'eshell-command-body' when implementing them, and were very hard to get 
> right (see bug#12571 for example).
> 
> Instead, let's improve Eshell's iterative command evaluation some more 
> so that you can write the implementations for these commands like 
> normal.

Since there haven't been any concerns about the patches themselves in 
the last two weeks-ish, merging this now as 1565dbcae3 and closing the bug.

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

From: Jim Porter <jporterbugs <at> gmail.com>
To: bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
Subject: 30.0.50; [PATCH] Simplify structured commands in Eshell
Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2023 23:28:46 -0800

[Message part 4 (text/plain, inline)]

Structured commands are just Eshell flow control commands, like 'if' and 
'while'. These expected you to set 'eshell-test-body' and 
'eshell-command-body' when implementing them, and were very hard to get 
right (see bug#12571 for example).

Instead, let's improve Eshell's iterative command evaluation some more 
so that you can write the implementations for these commands like 
normal. I think this is beneficial for two main reasons: a) it should 
get us closer to replacing Eshell's iterative evaluation with the CPS 
machinery in generator.el (bug#37635)[1], and b) third-parties should 
have an easier time writing their own fancy Eshell commands using the 
command-rewriting hooks.

Given that we have fairly thorough regression tests in Eshell now, I'm 
pretty confident that these patches don't break anything.

[1] I think I mentioned it elsewhere, but I'm hoping to make sure that 
when we do switch to the CPS machinery (or maybe to threads), it's just 
a drop-in replacement. That way, if there are problems, it should be 
easy to revert to the classic iterative evaluation code. Maybe we could 
even provide a defcustom for it just in case.

[0001-Simplify-iteration-in-Eshell-for-loops.patch (text/plain, attachment)]

[0002-Simplify-how-Eshell-s-iterative-evaluation-handles-i.patch (text/plain, attachment)]

[0003-Simplify-usage-of-while-forms-in-Eshell-s-iterative-.patch (text/plain, attachment)]

Previous Next

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