emacs-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Multiple Eshell process?


From: joakim
Subject: Re: Multiple Eshell process?
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 09:56:34 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.50 (gnu/linux)

"Jesuz Networks Inc. " <address@hidden> writes:

> Thanks for your answer, but it seems there is some wrong perception. 
>
> While Eshell is running offlineimap, which take some hours to get finished, I 
> could open another Emacs client instance and do something other things (like 
> running Gnus or playing Tetris or do some coding), while Eshell is running on 
> background. So it seems it is possible to have multiple things running, 
> because the other process (like Tetris or Flycheck)
> are using the same Lisp thread as Eshell?

When eshell is running elisp code, emacs will be busy evaluating the
elisp. This is what Eli said.

However, when you work in a shell a lot of times you start external
processes. These do not occupy the Emacs lisp thread, and to the user it
seems like Emacs is multi-tasking.



>
> 2015-11-09 22:00 GMT+01:00 Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden>:
>
>
>  > Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2015 21:43:06 +0100
>  > From: "Jesuz Networks Inc. " <address@hidden>
>  >
>  > When I'm compiling something in Eshell, of Importing my mail with 
> offlinemap
>  > tool, then I need to wait long time before a process in Eshell is finished 
> and
>  > I can use Eshell again.
>  > As far as it seems, I could only run one Eshell process.
>  >
>  > This is somewhat inconvenient. For example, when you run a process in Guake
>  > terminal, you can spawn another Guake terminal in a new tab and do your 
> thing
>  > while a process is still running in another tab.
>  >
>  > So I'm wondering if this could be possible with Eshell?
>
>  Eshell is actually a Lisp program, and Emacs has only one Lisp
>  thread. So no, this is not currently possible. It could be possible
>  when we integrate the concurrency branch into Emacs, though. Maybe.
>
>
>

-- 
Joakim Verona



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]