From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Daimrod <daimrod@gmail.com>
Subject: bug#17484: 24.3.91; Emacs Pretest (emacs-24.3.91.tar.xz) freeze
Date: Wed, 14 May 2014 10:12:45 +0900
Message-ID: <87r43x5fmm.fsf@tanger.home>
References: <87d2fiaxjw.fsf@tanger.home>
	<jwvzjilygsq.fsf-monnier+emacsbugs@gnu.org>
	<87tx8tajs5.fsf@tanger.home>
	<jwv1tvxy357.fsf-monnier+emacsbugs@gnu.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Return-path: <emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:34508)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1WkNls-0000eP-Ad
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 13 May 2014 21:14:18 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1WkNli-00088s-F0
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 13 May 2014 21:14:11 -0400
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.17484.B17484.140002999310303@debbugs.gnu.org>
In-Reply-To: <jwv1tvxy357.fsf-monnier+emacsbugs@gnu.org> (Stefan Monnier's
	message of "Tue, 13 May 2014 13:59:45 -0400")
List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." <emacs-orgmode.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: Stefan Monnier <monnier@IRO.UMontreal.CA>
Cc: Carsten Dominik <carsten@orgmode.org>, 17484@debbugs.gnu.org

Stefan Monnier <monnier@IRO.UMontreal.CA> writes:

>> So, that's an org-mode bug, I'll try to see if I can reproduce it
>
> Right: org-adaptive-fill-function should finish fairly promptly.
>
>> (though I wonder why it uses `inhibit-quit' in the first place).
>
> It's not org-mode which binds inhibit-quit but the C code that runs
> jit-lock.  The C code binds inhibit-quit basically any time we run
> "asynchronous code" (i.e. code run from redisplay, timers,
> process-filters, ...) since the user usually doesn't really know that
> such is running, so if she hits C-g she doesn't mean for it to interrupt
> that code, but instead to do something else (e.g. get out of the
> minibuffer).

Well, `org-mks' (in `org-capture.el') sets `inhibit-quit' to T and is
called by `org-capture'.

I have found 7 places were `inhibit-quit' was set to T in org-mode.

> The flip side is that all code run from jit/font-lock, process filters
> and timers should be super extra careful to finish promptly and never
> ever get into an inf-loop.

I can see why. :)

-- 
Daimrod/Greg