Thanks for the review!
"Stephen J. Turnbull" <turnbull(a)sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> writes:
Michael Sperber writes:
> +(defun start-file-process (name buffer program &rest program-args)
> + "Start a program in a subprocess. Return the process object for it.
> +Similar to `start-process', but may invoke a file handler based on
> +`default-directory'. See Info node `(elisp)Magic File Names'.
> +This handler ought to run PROGRAM, perhaps on the local host,
> +perhaps on a remote host that corresponds to `default-directory'.
What is the format of remote host specification?
We don't have that yet, as we don't have any file handlers for that yet.
> +In the latter case, the local part of `default-directory'
> +the working directory of the process.
> +PROGRAM and PROGRAM-ARGS might be file names.
Erm, what else might they be?
Remote-host specifications :-)
> +They are not
> +objects of file handler invocation. File handlers might not
> +support pty association, if PROGRAM is nil."
Do we need that last sentence? If it's rationale for *why* we don't
invoke file handlers, it doesn't belong in the docstring. Maybe in a
comment. If it is needed, I have no clue what it means.
I'll be happy to strike that sentence before pushing.
XEmacs-Patches mailing list