Re: Possible bug in xfns.c

2005-02-27 Thread Richard Stallman
BLOCK_INPUT; ... record_unwind_protect() ... UNBLOCK_INPUT; unbind_to(); I think that code is correct. Neither record_unwind_protect nor unbind_to does anything to interrupt_input_blocked. If there is no abnormal control transfer, unbind_to will run the

Re: Possible bug in xfns.c

2005-02-26 Thread David Kastrup
"Jan D." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > 2005-02-26 kl. 15.47 skrev David Kastrup: > >> >> Throwing a signal restores interrupt_input_blocked to the state of >> the recording of the stack frame. > > How does it do that? I can't find that in the code. Neither can I. I said that I don't have a clue

Re: Possible bug in xfns.c

2005-02-26 Thread Jan D.
2005-02-26 kl. 15.47 skrev David Kastrup: Throwing a signal restores interrupt_input_blocked to the state of the recording of the stack frame. How does it do that? I can't find that in the code. I assumed record_unwind_protect did just that, recorded one unwind action to take. In xfns.c, li

Possible bug in xfns.c

2005-02-26 Thread David Kastrup
Throwing a signal restores interrupt_input_blocked to the state of the recording of the stack frame. In xfns.c, line 5207, we have a BLOCK_INPUT. In line 5283 we have record_unwind_protect (clean_up_file_dialog, make_save_value (dialog, 0)); That means that clean_up_file_dialog will get called