[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: The order input events are processed.
From: |
Michaël Cadilhac |
Subject: |
Re: The order input events are processed. |
Date: |
Sun, 10 Sep 2006 15:14:59 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
Richard Stallman <address@hidden> writes:
> However, I've always dreamt about an unique entry point for
> unread-events: unread-command-events would store direct events (u-c-e
> =3D '(?a ?b)) or events as a cons, the cdr telling if input-method has
> to be used (u-c-e =3D '(?a (?b . nil) ?c)). Does it seems crazy? [2]
>
> It seems ugly and complex. Not as good as the present scheme.
Okey.
> \(fn SECONDS &optional NODISP)"
> ! (unless (or unread-command-events
> ! unread-post-input-method-events
> ! unread-input-method-events
> ! (>= unread-command-char 0))
Isn't input-pending-p enough?
> ! (when (or obsolete (numberp nodisp))
> ! (setq seconds (+ seconds (* 1e-3 nodisp)))
> ! (setq nodisp obsolete))
> ! (if noninteractive
> ! (progn (sleep-for seconds) t)
> ! (unless nodisp (redisplay))
> ! (or (<= seconds 0)
> ! (let ((read (read-event nil nil seconds)))
> ! (or (null read)
> ! (progn (push read unread-command-events) nil)))))))
I was thinking of an active loop because I thought the test had to be
made here, replacing « read-event ». If we're sure read-event will
not take an event from unread-input-method-events here, then it's ok.
--
| Michaël `Micha' Cadilhac | Si les religions etaient aussi tole- |
| Epita/LRDE Promo 2007 | rantes qu'elles le pretendent, il y |
| http://www.lrde.org/~cadilh_m | a longtemps qu'il n'y en aurait plus |
`-- - JID: address@hidden --' -- Moustic - --'
pgpEutfUpqGH3.pgp
Description: PGP signature