"Richard M. Stallman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Then, why does sit-for return t if unread-command-events is not > nil? > > That is a good question. Should it return nil immediately > without waiting when unread-command-events is nonempty? > That would be more coherent than the current behavior. > It would also be an incompatible change, and might break something. > > There are about 550 calls to sit-for in the Emacs sources. > To check all of them would be a lot of work. > > Perhaps we should make this change now, so that the pretesting > for the release will help us see if anything breaks. > What do people think?
Why take the risk of breaking currently working code this close (YMMV) to the release...? IMO, this is not the time for such a change in 22.x -- we know of one place (flyspell) that was affected by the present behaviuor and it has been fixed now. OTOH, you can install the change now on the unicode-2 branch for 23.x. -- Kim F. Storm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.cua.dk _______________________________________________ Emacs-devel mailing list Emacs-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel
