From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Drew Adams" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#11999: 24.1.50; New Info file suffix ".info" breaks `Info-find-node-2' Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2012 07:34:29 -0700 Message-ID: <1B7EF119D99541B6ABAFC4FB523F494A@us.oracle.com> References: <30361DAB51FE4AC487EBA7C11AACB36C@us.oracle.com><831uk688pk.fsf@gnu.org><35D365A3D0D0487CB7928FB2A672541D@us.oracle.com><83sjcl7b5w.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1342967740 9290 80.91.229.3 (22 Jul 2012 14:35:40 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2012 14:35:40 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 11999@debbugs.gnu.org To: "'Stefan Monnier'" , "'Eli Zaretskii'" Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Jul 22 16:35:40 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1SsxFy-0007nJ-Pv for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 22 Jul 2012 16:35:39 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:60073 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SsxFx-00075o-Sx for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 22 Jul 2012 10:35:37 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:41844) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SsxFu-00075c-Vw for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 22 Jul 2012 10:35:36 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SsxFt-0001JT-SU for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 22 Jul 2012 10:35:34 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:48206) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SsxFt-0001Iz-PC for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 22 Jul 2012 10:35:33 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SsxMA-0001a1-0F for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 22 Jul 2012 10:42:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: "Drew Adams" Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2012 14:42:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 11999 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 11999-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B11999.13429680796022 (code B ref 11999); Sun, 22 Jul 2012 14:42:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 11999) by debbugs.gnu.org; 22 Jul 2012 14:41:19 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57752 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SsxLS-0001Z4-MO for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 22 Jul 2012 10:41:19 -0400 Original-Received: from acsinet15.oracle.com ([141.146.126.227]:43182) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SsxLP-0001Yv-Qy for 11999@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 22 Jul 2012 10:41:16 -0400 Original-Received: from ucsinet22.oracle.com (ucsinet22.oracle.com [156.151.31.94]) by acsinet15.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.2.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.2.2) with ESMTP id q6MEYh8Z000712 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Sun, 22 Jul 2012 14:34:44 GMT Original-Received: from acsmt357.oracle.com (acsmt357.oracle.com [141.146.40.157]) by ucsinet22.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q6MEYg8Z028904 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 22 Jul 2012 14:34:43 GMT Original-Received: from abhmt107.oracle.com (abhmt107.oracle.com [141.146.116.59]) by acsmt357.oracle.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id q6MEYgHd026867; Sun, 22 Jul 2012 09:34:42 -0500 Original-Received: from dradamslap1 (/71.202.147.44) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Sun, 22 Jul 2012 07:34:42 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: Thread-Index: Ac1n73KIZvAuxA1jTWyUD7qNN5DJvAAIuWqA X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157 X-Source-IP: ucsinet22.oracle.com [156.151.31.94] X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:62272 Archived-At: > > Stefan, could you perhaps provide some insight? What is a "pilot > > error" in this context, > > A error of the user rather than of the author of the code. Yes, that's what I understood by "pilot error" (the former part: an error by the user). That is not what is going on when a user looks up a term that does not happen to be in the index (which is what this bug report was about). The user is doing nothing wrong there. And I'm guessing, without checking in detail and based only on the fact that so many calls to `error' were changed to `user-error' in info.el, that there might be additional inappropriate uses of `user-error' in info.el - perhaps many of them. And perhaps other files were also subjected to such a wholesale replacement. This kind of change requires time, analysis, & judgment. The person making the change at any given occurrence needs to read, understand the code, and (especially) think of the user. > > and how should Lisp programs use this new facility to (supposedly) > > provide better diagnostics and/or better error handling? > > user-error is just a standard "debug-ignored-error". So instead of > using error plus adding the text of the error to debug-ignored-errors, > you can just user user-error. > > If Drew gets a user-error that drops him in the debugger, it's because > he removed` user-error' from debug-ignored-errors. Not really. C-h v debug-ignored-errors: ,---- | debug-ignored-errors is a variable defined in `C source code'. | Its value is | (search-failed "^Invalid face:? " beginning-of-line beginning-of-buffer end-of-line end-of-buffer end-of-file buffer-read-only file-supersession user-error) | | Original value was | (beginning-of-line beginning-of-buffer end-of-line end-of-buffer end-of-file buffer-read-only file-supersession user-error) | ... `---- [BTW, as you can see, that value is printed too wide - 158 chars wide!. It should be limited (pretty-printed with filling to the usual max width), in line with the rest of a *Help* buffer.] And a quick test shows that use of `user-error' does not enter the debugger for me, whereas use of `error' does. So there must be something else going on here. But I just tried the original recipe again, and now it does not enter the debugger. I've tried to see what I might have changed locally in the meantime, but I haven't found anything yet. I have not changed `debug-ignored-errors', of that I am certain. At any rate, let's not worry for this bug about whether the debugger is entered. That can be discussed later if necessary, and I have already said that I do not have an opinion about whether it should be entered for such an error (i.e., like this one in Info). The real questions for this bug are (1) whether all of the occurrences of `user-error' in info.el are appropriate (in particular, the one for index lookup) and (2) whether the doc about `user-error' is accurate and clear. > >> An index lookup that finds no hit is NOT "expected to be > >> the result of an incorrect manipulation on the part of > >> the user, rather than the result of an actual problem." > > By "actual problem", I meant "a bug in the code", i.e. a problem that > can be fixed by correcting the code. That too is what I guessed, at least the latter part: a coding mistake. But that description is a false, binary choice. The same false choice is presented by "A error of the user rather than of the author of the code." There are uses of error signaling (and more generally, alerting the user and perhaps returning to top level) that are neither. IOW, there is a lot that is neither an error by the user nor a mistake in the code. Without clarifying the doc & design wrt this middle ground, we will continue to (a) confuse users and (b) have inappropriate uses of either `error' or `user-error'.