From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/12849
Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic@srce.hr>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general
Subject: Re: Idleness
Date: 18 Nov 1997 00:05:57 +0100
Message-ID: <kigyb2n6rze.fsf@jagor.srce.hr>
References: <kig4t5dpp6k.fsf@jagor.srce.hr> <d6d4t5bsfhb.fsf@octarine.uio.no> <kiglnynbc49.fsf@jagor.srce.hr> <x7hg9b70h7.fsf@peorth.gweep.net> <kigbtzj9p0o.fsf@jagor.srce.hr> <d6d90unqh45.fsf@octarine.uio.no>
NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no
X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035152314 6015 80.91.224.250 (20 Oct 2002 22:18:34 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 22:18:34 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: ding@ifi.uio.no
Return-Path: <ding-request@ifi.uio.no>
Original-Received: from xemacs.org (xemacs.cs.uiuc.edu [128.174.252.16])
	by altair.xemacs.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id QAA17186
	for <steve@altair.xemacs.org>; Mon, 17 Nov 1997 16:27:00 -0800
Original-Received: from ifi.uio.no (ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2])
	by xemacs.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id SAA05300
	for <steve@xemacs.org>; Mon, 17 Nov 1997 18:27:24 -0600 (CST)
Original-Received: from jagor.srce.hr (hniksic@jagor.srce.hr [161.53.2.130])
	by ifi.uio.no (8.8.7/8.8.7/ifi0.2) with ESMTP id AAA27849
	for <ding@ifi.uio.no>; Tue, 18 Nov 1997 00:06:50 +0100 (MET)
Original-Received: (from hniksic@localhost)
	by jagor.srce.hr (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA17720;
	Tue, 18 Nov 1997 00:05:57 +0100 (MET)
Original-To: Harald Meland <Harald.Meland@usit.uio.no>
X-Attribution: Hrvoje
X-Face: Mie8:rOV<\c/~z{s.X4A{!?vY7{drJ([U]0O=W/<W*SMo/Mv:58:*_y~ki>xDi&N7XG
        KV^$k0m3Oe/)'e%3=$PCR&3ITUXH,cK>]bci&<qQ>Ff%x_>1`T(+M2Gg/fgndU%k*ft
        [(7._6e0n-V%|%'[c|q:;}td$#INd+;?!-V=c8Pqf}3J
In-Reply-To: Harald Meland's message of "17 Nov 1997 23:40:26 +0100"
Original-Lines: 22
X-Mailer: Quassia Gnus v0.12/XEmacs 20.3(beta94) - "Madrid"
Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:12849
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:12849

Harald Meland <Harald.Meland@usit.uio.no> writes:

> That being said, if you think that
> 
> 	* adding a repeating non-idle timer from the idle-timer
> 	function, and
> 	* making sure the repeating non-idle timer gets removed as
> 	soon as Emacs becomes un-idle again
> 
> isn't a hack (...)

I think that:

	* adding a new idle timer from the idle-timer callback

is less of a hack.  I wonder if it would work correctly?

-- 
Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic@srce.hr> | Student at FER Zagreb, Croatia
--------------------------------+--------------------------------
`VI' - An editor used by those heretics that don't subscribe to
       the Emacs religion.