Re: Revamping sit-for

[Chong Yidong]

"Drew Adams" <address@hidden> writes:

> Excuse me if I'm misunderstanding, but how can you change the signature of
> sit-for in a way that breaks existing code? IIUC, it is changing from
>
>   (sit-for seconds)
>   (sit-for seconds milliseconds)
>   (sit-for seconds milliseconds nodisp)
>
> to
>
>   (sit-for seconds)
>   (sit-for seconds nodisp)
>   (sit-for seconds nodisp obsolete)
>
> That means that existing calls that use the milliseconds arg will be newly
> interpreted to consider that arg as a no-display arg, no?

No.  If the third argument is non-nil, it uses the old behavior.  But
this is considered an obsolete behavior, so it is only briefly
explained in the docstring; all this is identical to the current
behavior.