Stefan Reichör <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> Masatake YAMATO <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> In such case what we can do is just warning like:
>>    
>>    (add-hook 'kill-buffer-hook 'tla-warning-dont-kill-buffer)
>
> That is a nice idea!
>
> tla-warning-dont-kill-buffer warns the user, if the tla command is
> still running. Otherwise it is o.k. to silently kill the buffer.

Yep, this sounds like a good idea.  We would still need to deal with the
case where the user goes ahead and closes the buffer anyway--I'd still
prefer this not to throw an error.  For example, if I accidentally run a
tla-missing, I'd like to be able to close the buffer and forget about
it, not have to wait for the processes to finish or wait for error
messages.

Cheers,

Mark

-- 
Mark Triggs
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


Reply via email to