On Thu 9-Nov-06 5:27pm -0600, Yakov Lerner wrote:
> I filed another change at
> http://www.vim.org/tips/tip.php?tip_id=1379
> to this piece that makes it safe when two or more scripts use
> this same technique simultaneously (otheriwse, &ut restoration
> can go wrong, order of autocommands triggering is unpredictable).
> Bill, do you think the "if s:Pecho!=''|' check in autocommand is necessary ?
No I do not - it was just there from your original.
> " further improvement in restoration of the &updatetime. To make this
> " usable in the plugins, we want it to be safe for the case when
> " two plugins use same this same technique. Two independent
> " restorations of &ut can run in unpredictable order. In order to
> " make it safe, we add additional check in &ut restoration.
> let s:Pecho=''
> fu! s:Pecho(msg)
> let s:hold_ut=&ut | if &ut>1|let &ut=1|en
> let s:Pecho=a:msg
> aug Pecho
> au CursorHold * if s:Pecho!=''|echo s:Pecho
> \|let s:Pecho=''|if s:hold_ut > &ut |let &ut=s:hold_ut|en|en
> \|aug Pecho|exe 'au!'|aug END|aug! Pecho
> aug END
> endf
> In this form, I think it's safe for use in plugins.
I don't see the protection from collision. I haven't
updated the tip yet, but the following code appears to solve
the potential problem and removes unnecessary logic:
" This update eliminates all "if" statements and introduces
" a locked variable to prevent collisions. Should a call to
" Pecho occur before the CursorHold is triggered, that call
" will wait for the triggering to unlock.
let g:PechoLock = 0
fu! s:Pecho(msg)
wh islocked("g:PechoLock")|sl|endw
lockv g:PechoLock|let s:hold_ut=&ut|let &ut=1
let s:Pecho=a:msg
aug Pecho
au CursorHold * ec s:Pecho
\|let &ut=s:hold_ut|unlo g:PechoLock
\|aug Pecho|exe 'au!'|aug END|aug! Pecho
aug END
endf
--
Best regards,
Bill
