[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Issue GC-MESSAGES (Version 2)
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: Issue GC-MESSAGES (Version 2)
- From: masinter.pa@Xerox.COM
- Date: 9 Jan 89 00:07 PST
- In-reply-to: Dan L. Pierson <email@example.com>'s message of Tue, 03 Jan 89 13:53:40 EST
I sent a note to cl-editorial. I had a proposal for "unsolicited messages"
which is handles only those things like auto-load heralds and GC messages.
I think that LOAD and COMPILE progress notices are "solicited", at least by
Maybe this just subsumes GC-MESSAGES or should be handled under this name?
Problem: Is it legal for an implementation to produce unsolicited output,
e.g., GC notifications, autoload heralds, and progress messages from
COMPILE-FILE or LOAD?
Unsolicited messages, such as GC notifications and autoload heralds, if
they are produced by an implementation, should not be directed to
*standard-output*, *error-output*. If an implementation produces them, they
may be produced on a stream that is not "shared" with any of the streams
that a user might redefine or redirect. (This really means that it is OK to
direct such notifications to *terminal-io* since a user may not redirect
Messages such as progress reports from LOAD and COMPILE are "solicited",
and are not covered by this issue. See issue COMPILE-AND-LOAD-VERBOSE.