GNU bug report logs - #78737
sit-for behavior changes when byte-compiled

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Daniel Colascione <dancol <at> dancol.org>
Cc: 78737 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, pipcet <at> protonmail.com, monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca
Subject: bug#78737: sit-for behavior changes when byte-compiled
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2025 10:55:57 +0300

> Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2025 15:07:51 -0400
> From: Daniel Colascione <dancol <at> dancol.org>
> CC: 78737 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, pipcet <at> protonmail.com
> 
> On June 13, 2025 2:16:08 PM EDT, Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca> wrote:
> >> What is a "normal quit"?
> >
> >A single C-g.
> >
> >> What is "emergency quit"?
> >
> >Something like `C-g C-g C-g`, tho we don't have that implemented,
> >currently, AFAIK.
> 
> 
> How about this terminology?
> 
> C-g --- normal quit
> 
> C-g C-g C-g --- urgent quit (breaks out of read-event. should probably break out of redisplay too?)

Breaking out of redisplay should remain an opt-in behavior, like it is
now on the branch.  When turned on, I'm okay with having it activated
with several C-g presses.

> C-g C-g C-g C-g C-g C-g --- emergency quit. ignores inhibit-quit. good chance of horking your Emacs by violating atomicity assumptions. Display "are you sure?" message before final C-g.

This seems to ignore the "emergency exit" feature we have today.  I
wouldn't want to lose that as well.  Or did you mean to leave that
activated by "C-g C-g"?  If the latter, wouldn't we be prone to
sometimes activating the emergency exit instead of the "urgent quit"?

Previous Next

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