[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: call-process and incremental display of output
From: |
John Shahid |
Subject: |
Re: call-process and incremental display of output |
Date: |
Wed, 26 Dec 2018 12:47:12 -0500 |
User-agent: |
mu4e 1.1.0; emacs 27.0.50 |
FYI, I have been using this patch without any noticeable issues. Not
sure if we should merge it.
Stefan Monnier <monnier@IRO.UMontreal.CA> writes:
>> Sounds good. I'll make the change locally and test it for a month or
>> two and report back.
>
> FWIW, I'm running with the following change now:
>
> diff --git a/src/editfns.c b/src/editfns.c
> index e995b38a44..db95a8a20a 100644
> --- a/src/editfns.c
> +++ b/src/editfns.c
> @@ -782,6 +782,12 @@ save_excursion_save (union specbinding *pdl)
> {
> eassert (pdl->unwind_excursion.kind == SPECPDL_UNWIND_EXCURSION);
> pdl->unwind_excursion.marker = Fpoint_marker ();
> + /* Suggested by John Shahid <jvshahid@gmail.com> in the "call-process
> and
> + * incremental display of output" thread of help-gnu-emacs.
> + * This matches the manually-created behavior of compile.el's process
> filter
> + * and probably others like comint as well. */
> + XMARKER (pdl->unwind_excursion.marker)->insertion_type
> + = !NILP (Vwindow_point_insertion_type);
> /* Selected window if current buffer is shown in it, nil otherwise. */
> pdl->unwind_excursion.window
> = (EQ (XWINDOW (selected_window)->contents, Fcurrent_buffer ())
>
> I haven't double checked that it does what I think it does, to be
> honest, but at least after a mere 48h of normal use I haven't noticed
> anything weird yet.
>
>
> Stefan
[Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread] |
- Re: call-process and incremental display of output,
John Shahid <=