Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!ncar!ames!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!osu-cis!att-cb!clyde!rutgers!bellcore!sambation!perry
From: perry@sambation.bellcore.com (Perry Metzger)
Newsgroups: comp.emacs
Subject: Re: Need Info: Server Mode
Message-ID: <6227@bellcore.bellcore.com>
Date: 20 Mar 88 01:30:58 GMT
References: <8803182102.AA07523@icst-cmr.arpa>
Sender: news@bellcore.bellcore.com
Reply-To: perry@bellcore.com (Perry Metzger)
Organization: Bellcore, Morristown, NJ
Lines: 17

>>   Why so much work?  Why doesn't emacsclient write its message and
>>   then SIGCONT the stopped emacs,
>
>Because that's not how it was designed to work. The emacs server may
>already be running in another window. In this case, the `window' exists
>in time rather than in space. Anyway, how would the server know how to
>get back to the client? You'd only have solved half the problem.

Oh, come on. This isn't a legitimate objection. You can easily
determine if there is an emacs running on the same tty or pty, so the
question of "do I send it a SIGCONT" is easy to handle. Similarly, the
client can pass its pid to the emacs in server mode and get a signal
back telling it to wake up.

I think the benefits of having a scheme like this would be great. Most
people in the world still use terminals, not bitmapped displays.
Providing something that they can use conveniently is a big plus.