Re: sit-for

[Richard Stallman]

    > Another possibility just occurred to me.  Unlike the old sit-for, the
    > new sit-for is not interrupted by input coming from processes (as
    > opposed to user input).  If gnus (or some other package) relies on
    > this behavior, a bug will arise.

    IMO, sit-for should never be interrupted by input coming from a
    subprocess (that is what accept-process-output is for), and code
    which relies on that behaviour is wrong.

Did the old sit-for really wake up when process input came in?
It was never supposed to -- that would have been a bug.  
But I don't recall seeing any reports of such a bug.
The bug was that input events that did not correspond to any
real input could wake it up.  But process output does not
work by generating input events.