[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Should `cancel-timer' use `delete' instead of `delq'?
From: |
Stefan Monnier |
Subject: |
Re: Should `cancel-timer' use `delete' instead of `delq'? |
Date: |
Wed, 06 Sep 2006 10:00:44 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
> Well, I think that's exactly what I used in my defvar (after having been
> bitten once), so I could henceforth re-eval it ("abnormally") without worry
> or forethought. In any case, the "traditional" way to do that is apparently
> to use `define-minor-mode'...
The traditional example I showed is not exempt from the OP.
When you re-evaluate the defvar with C-M-x, the timer var is forcefully
reset to nil, thus potentially forgetting a running timer, which then
becomes again difficult to stop.
Maybe you did realize that, but I got the feeling that you thought it didn't
suffer from this problem.
And the same thing could/would happen if you use `timer-create'.
The problem is not how you define/create your timer, but simply the fact
that if you "forget" your timer object, it'll still be active as long as
it's in the timer-list.
One way to "solve" this problem is to change C-M-x so that in the case the
variable's current value is a timer, it first cancels it, before resetting
the var. Similarly to my "recent" patch which cancels timers when unloading
a package.
Stefan
- Re: Should `cancel-timer' use `delete' instead of `delq'?, (continued)
- Re: Should `cancel-timer' use `delete' instead of `delq'?, Stefan Monnier, 2006/09/05
- RE: Should `cancel-timer' use `delete' instead of `delq'?, Drew Adams, 2006/09/05
- Re: Should `cancel-timer' use `delete' instead of `delq'?, Kevin Rodgers, 2006/09/05
- RE: Should `cancel-timer' use `delete' instead of `delq'?, Drew Adams, 2006/09/05
- Re: Should `cancel-timer' use `delete' instead of `delq'?, Miles Bader, 2006/09/05
- RE: Should `cancel-timer' use `delete' instead of `delq'?, Drew Adams, 2006/09/05
- Re: Should `cancel-timer' use `delete' instead of `delq'?, Miles Bader, 2006/09/05
- RE: Should `cancel-timer' use `delete' instead of `delq'?, Drew Adams, 2006/09/06
- Re: Should `cancel-timer' use `delete' instead of `delq'?, Miles Bader, 2006/09/06
- Re: Should `cancel-timer' use `delete' instead of `delq'?, David Kastrup, 2006/09/06
- Re: Should `cancel-timer' use `delete' instead of `delq'?,
Stefan Monnier <=
- RE: Should `cancel-timer' use `delete' instead of `delq'?, Drew Adams, 2006/09/06
- Re: Should `cancel-timer' use `delete' instead of `delq'?, David Kastrup, 2006/09/06
- Re: Should `cancel-timer' use `delete' instead of `delq'?, David Kastrup, 2006/09/05
- Re: Should `cancel-timer' use `delete' instead of `delq'?, Stefan Monnier, 2006/09/05
- Re: Should `cancel-timer' use `delete' instead of `delq'?, Richard Stallman, 2006/09/06
Re: Should `cancel-timer' use `delete' instead of `delq'?, Stuart D. Herring, 2006/09/05
Re: Should `cancel-timer' use `delete' instead of `delq'?, Richard Stallman, 2006/09/06