[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#39977: 28.0.50; Unhelpful stack trace
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
bug#39977: 28.0.50; Unhelpful stack trace |
Date: |
Sat, 21 Mar 2020 15:15:42 +0200 |
> Cc: enometh@meer.net, 39977@debbugs.gnu.org
> From: martin rudalics <rudalics@gmx.at>
> Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2020 10:32:24 +0100
>
> >> I'm afraid that we already might mishandle some of those simple cases.
> >
> > That just makes my point stronger, doesn't it?
>
> Not really. It's easy for delete_frame to refuse deleting a frame right
> at the beginning. But once it has accepted a deletion, it might become
> hard to deal with all the consequences.
I don't think I understand where you are going with this.
> >> > The problem is how to do this without breaking legitimate code. For
> >> > example, changing the window configuration temporarily, then changing
> >> > it back is quite legitimate,
> >>
> >> Right in the middle of redisplay, while constructing the mode line or
> >> the title format?
> >
> > Why not? As long as things are back as they were by the time :eval
> > returns, I see no reason to disallow such code.
>
> Such a change in the window configuration would take place in a state
> where certain variables have temporary settings only. Selected frame,
> selected window and current buffer have been set by redisplay in a fast,
> improvised manner. I would never trust the outcome of save_window_save
> or 'set-window-configuration' in such a state.
This isn't about trust. This is about letting users' Lisp do anything
they want as long as the results allow redisplay to continue after
that Lisp returns. I don't think it's right to disallow certain
actions just because they _might_ cause problems.
> > No, they are there in cases where we simply don't know how to
> > continue.
>
> If that's the reason, then SELECTED_FRAME can easily set selected_frame
> to some live frame and continue.
Something like that, yes.
- bug#39977: 28.0.50; Unhelpful stack trace, (continued)
- bug#39977: 28.0.50; Unhelpful stack trace, Eli Zaretskii, 2020/03/17
- bug#39977: 28.0.50; Unhelpful stack trace, martin rudalics, 2020/03/17
- bug#39977: 28.0.50; Unhelpful stack trace, Eli Zaretskii, 2020/03/17
- bug#39977: 28.0.50; Unhelpful stack trace, martin rudalics, 2020/03/18
- bug#39977: 28.0.50; Unhelpful stack trace, Eli Zaretskii, 2020/03/18
- bug#39977: 28.0.50; Unhelpful stack trace, martin rudalics, 2020/03/18
- bug#39977: 28.0.50; Unhelpful stack trace, Eli Zaretskii, 2020/03/18
- bug#39977: 28.0.50; Unhelpful stack trace, martin rudalics, 2020/03/19
- bug#39977: 28.0.50; Unhelpful stack trace, Eli Zaretskii, 2020/03/19
- bug#39977: 28.0.50; Unhelpful stack trace, martin rudalics, 2020/03/21
- bug#39977: 28.0.50; Unhelpful stack trace,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- bug#39977: 28.0.50; Unhelpful stack trace, martin rudalics, 2020/03/22
- bug#39977: 28.0.50; Unhelpful stack trace, Eli Zaretskii, 2020/03/23
- bug#39977: 28.0.50; Unhelpful stack trace, martin rudalics, 2020/03/24
- bug#39977: 28.0.50; Unhelpful stack trace, Eli Zaretskii, 2020/03/28
- bug#39977: 28.0.50; Unhelpful stack trace, martin rudalics, 2020/03/29
- bug#39977: 28.0.50; Unhelpful stack trace, Madhu, 2020/03/18
- bug#39977: 28.0.50; Unhelpful stack trace, Madhu, 2020/03/15
- bug#39977: 28.0.50; Unhelpful stack trace, martin rudalics, 2020/03/16