[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Checking Process Status
From: |
CarlC |
Subject: |
Re: Checking Process Status |
Date: |
Wed, 12 Feb 2003 22:30:46 GMT |
"CarlC" <carlc@snowbd.com> wrote in message
news:Ewz2a.39752$yn1.1662533@twister.austin.rr.com...
> This code has worked for me. To do away with the "undesirable
consequences",
> I make this temporary in the compile function:
>
> (defadvice compile (before cobol-compile activate)
> "Set compile-command and make compile syncronous"
> (fset 'save-start-process (symbol-function 'start-process))
> (fmakunbound 'start-process))
>
> (defadvice compile (after cobol-compile activate)
> "Process cobol error listing."
> (fset 'start-process 'save-start-process)
> ...
Spoke too soon. This code breaks with "Symbol's chain of function
indirections contains a loop: start-process" if I run a compile more than
once and then try to open a shell buffer. Anyone know the proper way to
accomplish this?
- Re: Checking Process Status, (continued)
- Re: Checking Process Status, Kevin Rodgers, 2003/02/03
- Re: Checking Process Status, CarlC, 2003/02/03
- Re: Checking Process Status, David Kastrup, 2003/02/03
- Re: Checking Process Status, CarlC, 2003/02/03
- Re: Checking Process Status, Kevin Rodgers, 2003/02/03
- Re: Checking Process Status, Jay Belanger, 2003/02/04
- Re: Checking Process Status, Kevin Rodgers, 2003/02/10
- Re: Checking Process Status, Eli Zaretskii, 2003/02/11
- Re: Checking Process Status, CarlC, 2003/02/12
- Re: Checking Process Status,
CarlC <=
- Re: Checking Process Status, David Kastrup, 2003/02/12
- Re: Checking Process Status, CarlC, 2003/02/12
- Re: Checking Process Status, David Kastrup, 2003/02/12
- Re: Checking Process Status, Kai Großjohann, 2003/02/13
Re: Checking Process Status, Kevin Rodgers, 2003/02/11