[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Redisplay hook error backtraces

From: Eli Zaretskii
Subject: Re: Redisplay hook error backtraces
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2022 08:12:51 +0300

> Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2022 20:12:42 +0000
> Cc: larsi@gnus.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> From: Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de>
> > I still don't think I understand why testing redisplaying_p and the
> > new optional variable would not be enough.
> We've got to distinguish between the signals we want to generate
> backtraces for and those we don't.  redisplaying_p is not relevant to
> that, I think.  For example, we don't want to generate a backtrace for a
> "failed" evaluation of the code generated by `c-safe'.

You want to distinguish errors inside condition-case?  If they are not
already marked in some way that allows you to do so, I think it's
better to do it the other way around: bind some variable in
internal_lisp_condition_case before invoking the body.

> > > You mean, all the changes in eval.c and keyboard.c?  I think the changes
> > > to internal_condition_case_n are essential to the patch, and I honestly
> > > don't think it can be done much more elegantly, but I'm open to
> > > suggestions.
> > Can we discuss how to implement it without introducing a special
> > handler and without adding new safe_run_hooks_* functions?
> OK.  Perhaps with extra optional arguments, that kind of thing?

Maybe, I don't know.  I still think the job of signal_or_quit and
safe_run_hooks is almost the same when you want to collect backtrace,
so too many differences strike me as unexpected.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]