[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Suggested change in net/browse-url.el
From: |
David Kastrup |
Subject: |
Re: Suggested change in net/browse-url.el |
Date: |
05 Apr 2004 04:22:16 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3.50 |
address@hidden (Kim F. Storm) writes:
> Richard Stallman <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > Since I use 0 here, the output of calling the process is discarded
> > and Emacs does _not_ wait.
> >
> > You're right. Sorry for not noticing that.
> >
> > In fact, this way of using call-process is the _only_ way to start a
> > process in the background without getting an associated process object
> > within Emacs. It is a bit confusing that the API for starting a
> > particularly asynchronous kind of process is hidden in the function
> > used normally for starting synchronous processes,
> >
> > Good point. We could add a new function for this: fork-process. What
> > do people think of that?
>
> It would be ok to add it (e.g. in subr.el), but fork-process would
> be a mis-leading name for it IMO -- fork means that you get two
> identical processes (i.e. two emacs processes running).
>
> I think call-process-nowait would be better (we already have an
> analogy with open-network-stream-nowait). It would simply be a
> macro which calls call-process with 0 BUFFER argument -- but with a
> specific doc string.
That sounds like a reasonably good way to make that functionality
more visible.
Maybe we would also need other system calls for more functionality:
the lack of job control (putting a program into background after
having started it in the foreground) in eshell might point to that.
But the addition under this name and functionality is nothing that
would declare a can of worms like that open.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum