Re: Port `start-file-process' and `start-file-process-shell-command'

Thanks for the review!

"Stephen J. Turnbull" <[email protected]> writes:

> Michael Sperber writes:
>
>  > +;;;###autoload
>  > +(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' becomes
>  > +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.

-- 
Regards,
Mike