--- Begin Message ---
|
Subject: |
Please keep bytecode out of *Backtrace* buffers |
|
Date: |
Tue, 07 Sep 2010 09:35:10 +0800 |
Please keep bytecode out of *Backtrace* buffers.
* It is unreadable.
* It will cause problems when sent via email. Even if one runs col(1)
and strings(1) on it, nobody can read it anyway.
* The mountain of gobbledygook makes people reading give up on trying to help.
E.g., http://article.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.w3m/8695
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
|
Subject: |
Re: bug#6991: Please keep bytecode out of *Backtrace* buffers |
|
Date: |
Sat, 27 Feb 2016 14:43:00 +1030 |
|
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1.50 (gnu/linux) |
John Wiegley <address@hidden> writes:
>>>>>> Drew Adams <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> What's more, _users_ currently do the work by hand, so it must be possible
>> to at least partly (probably fully) get it done by program. If users can
>> manually (time-consuming and error-prone) redact the byte-code when pasting
>> a backtrace into a mail etc. then that can be done by program.
>
> Drew, can you show me what it will look like to have the elision performed?
> Sometimes the byte-code contains strings that give me a clue as to the
> problem, so I'm wondering what will disappear if this is fixed.
I thought the post I made yesterday showed the difference? And it's
that the byte codes themselves get replaced by "..<bytecode>..", and not
the symbols (etc.) that are useful for figuring out backtraces.
But the patch was backwards -- it inhibited it outside of backtraces
instead of in backtraces.
--
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no
--- End Message ---