From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/10735 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: gsstark@MIT.EDU (Greg Stark) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: asynchronous backends Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 09:12:18 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035150554 26054 80.91.224.250 (20 Oct 2002 21:49:14 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 21:49:14 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: Original-Received: from ifi.uio.no (0@ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2]) by deanna.miranova.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id GAA03079 for ; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 06:34:09 -0700 Original-Received: from g63-83.citenet.net (brnstndkramden.acf.nyu.edu@g63-83.citenet.net [207.183.47.83]) by ifi.uio.no with ESMTP (8.6.11/ifi2.4) id for ; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 15:12:33 +0200 Original-Received: by g63-83.citenet.net id m0wHqz4-0008fvC (Debian Smail-3.2 1996-Jul-4 #2); Thu, 17 Apr 1997 09:12:18 -0400 (EDT) Original-To: ding@ifi.uio.no, ratinox@peorth.gweep.net Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:10735 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:10735 > Emacs cannot do this, not the way you want. Wrong. Please go back and read my orginal post, This is precisely the claim i refuted then. In fact i alluded to this in the last paragraph of my post, neither the Man package, nor the W3 package, nor the original emacs interface to the system my backend is for are figments of my imagination. I am familiar with both the Emacs features nntp uses (it doesn't actually use process filters any more, read the code) and with threaded environments. Threaded environments do not change what is possible, they only make implementing asynchronous interfaces easier and more natural, it is entirely possible to implement what i described without a threaded elisp interpreter, i explained how in my post last September. greg