Richard Stallman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Perhaps we should undo the recent change in sit-for. > > I don't remember the specific case for which we made it. > > If it was one specific caller that needed another facility, > > let's make (sit-for -1) do this, as someone else suggested. > > Here is a way to do that. > > It looks correct to me.
Patch installed, docs and NEWS updated. -- Kim F. Storm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.cua.dk _______________________________________________ emacs-pretest-bug mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-pretest-bug
