From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/18015 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lloyd Zusman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: I fixed it, but I need Lars ... (Was: *Group* buffer disappearance) Date: 21 Oct 1998 11:17:49 -400 Sender: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035156614 3937 80.91.224.250 (20 Oct 2002 23:30:14 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 23:30:14 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Hrvoje Niksic Return-Path: Original-Received: from fisher.math.uh.edu (fisher.math.uh.edu [129.7.128.35]) by sclp3.sclp.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA24733 for ; Wed, 21 Oct 1998 11:23:41 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu (lists@Sina.HPC.UH.EDU [129.7.3.5]) by fisher.math.uh.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAB17181; Wed, 21 Oct 1998 10:18:28 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Wed, 21 Oct 1998 10:18:28 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: from sclp3.sclp.com (root@sclp3.sclp.com [209.195.19.139]) by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id KAA25117 for ; Wed, 21 Oct 1998 10:18:14 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: from ljz.asfast.net (gnus@ljz.asfast.net [205.230.75.82]) by sclp3.sclp.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA24650 for ; Wed, 21 Oct 1998 11:17:55 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: (from gnus@localhost) by ljz.asfast.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) id LAA14149; Wed, 21 Oct 1998 11:17:49 -0400 Original-To: ding@gnus.org X-Face: "!ga1s|?LNLE3MeeeEYs(%LIl9q[xV9!j4#xf4!**BFW_ihlOb;:Slb>)vy>CJM writes: > [ ... ] > > C-g trap is not undesirable; it's just that you're confusing > condition-case and unwind-protect. > > condition-case should be used when you want to selectively trap errors > and do cleanup code. What we need here is the cleanup code that > evaluates no matter what way we exit from the function -- including > C-g. This is exactly what unwind-protect is for. > > So, my patch adds unwind protection twice: once for the undisplayer to > be set, and once for the buffer to be killed after it is saved (or > not). I hope this makes sense. It's clear to me now. I had thought that the only time we would want to clean up prior to `gnus-summary-exit' is if an error or an abort occurred during the method call. If we're supposed to be cleaning up prior to `gnus-summary-exit' even in the case where the method succeeds, then I understand why you're proceeding as you are. ... or at least I *think* I understand. :) -- Lloyd Zusman ljz@asfast.com