[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Message buffer time-stamps
From: |
Richard Stallman |
Subject: |
Re: Message buffer time-stamps |
Date: |
Sun, 26 Dec 2004 23:09:44 -0500 |
I see several variables are protected from GC in `message_dolog'
as well as in functions that call it. I suppose that is already done
with the expectation of possible GC in `message_dolog'.
Yes, it seems to try to protect itself. I just examined its callers,
and they seem to be safe too.
> However, I'd suggest instead using an idle timer to check that
> a message has been added, and to add a timestamp.
I don't understand how timers can help to insert message timestamp.
When a timer calls its function it will insert too late timestamp.
It would be a little inexact, using the time when the command ends,
but it would be no big deal.
However, since your idea seems to safe, it is better to use
your idea.
> There is another issue. Right now there's a feature to combine
> repeated messages. If you put time stamps in the buffer, that would
> break this feature, unless the time stamp code takes pains to keep
> it working.
This is right. Time stamps should break this feature. Every repeated
message should have its own time stamp.
Well, if you're sure you want that, I won't argue. But I would not
want that to be the default.