Matthieu MOY <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Quoting Mark Triggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>
>> I suppose the least painful way to do it would be to add a new function
>> that will ultimately replace tla-run-arch and gradually change the
>> commands over to using that instead? I'll add a note to HACKING
>> explaining the whole thing.
>
> I suggest you add a tla--run-tla function to tla-core.el that will replace
> tla--run-arch gradually.
Okay, cool.
> Just a thought : synchronous and asynchronous processes are now managed really
> differently. Wouldn't it be worth having two different functions?
>
> tla--run-tla-synchron
> tla--run-tla-asynchron
>
> ?
Currently my tla-run-arch is just defined as:
(defun tla-run-arch (arglist run-asynchron &rest keys)
(message "tla-run-arch: %S" arglist)
(if run-asynchron
(apply 'tla-run-asynchronously "tla" arglist keys)
(apply 'tla-run-synchronously "tla" arglist keys)))
So it's really just a wrapper around those two functions. They're
implemented quite differently, but they behave fairly similarly (they
both take :finish, :error and :killed arguments, for instance). Is
this the sort of thing you mean, or would it be better to have the
caller choose which function they want?
I guess I'll stumble across these sort of things as I start making
changes :o)
Mark
--
Mark Triggs
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
