GNU bug report logs - #76969
kill-buffer fails silently when a thread exists where it's current

Previous Next

Full log

Message #83 received at 76969 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Dmitry Gutov <dmitry <at> gutov.dev>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: sbaugh <at> janestreet.com, 76969 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#76969: kill-buffer fails silently when a thread exists where
 it's current
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2025 04:39:33 +0300

On 22/07/2025 15:54, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> So if we make it an optional argument of 'make-thread', and the default
>> is for thread's buffer to be killable, that might call for a name change
>> (flipping the meaning).
>>
>> Should it be
>>
>>     (make-thread FUNCTION &optional NAME BUFFER-PROTECTED)
>>
>> ?
> I'd prefer to call that argument BUFFER-DISPOSITION.

I had to google it just now. A term from POSIX signals?

Makes certain sense.

Seems like the default value would have to be nil, though, if it's 
passed as an optional argument to a function.

Are we okay with nil meaning "thread's buffer is killed and sent a 
signal", t meaning "thread's buffer is never killed" and 'silently' 
meaning "thread's buffer is killed without a signal"?

Previous Next

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