Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!mit-eddie!ll-xn!ames!pasteur!ucbvax!ICST-CMR.ARPA!rbj From: rbj@ICST-CMR.ARPA (Root Boy Jim) Newsgroups: comp.emacs Subject: Need Info: Server Mode Message-ID: <8803240146.AA20637@icst-cmr.arpa> Date: 24 Mar 88 01:46:40 GMT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Organization: The Internet Lines: 32 From: Perry Metzger >> 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. I didn't say it couldn't be done. I said that is not how it was designed. And of course, sending an extraneous SIGCONT shouldn't really hurt. You mention an interesting point about terminals. The bitmap freaks are actually saying `who uses terminals anymore?' And the laser printer freaks think that no one uses line printers anymore either. Hmmmmph! (Root Boy) Jim Cottrell National Bureau of Standards Flamer's Hotline: (301) 975-5688 You mean you don't want to watch WRESTLING from ATLANTA?