From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#47207: 28.0.50; decode_next_window_args crash Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2021 11:38:28 +0200 Message-ID: <8335wsdcob.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83r1kddi2r.fsf@gnu.org> <37300876-70d1-c741-8a4d-97d024fdf6cf@gmx.at> <83k0q5dbml.fsf@gnu.org> <64dca5b5-1234-9176-dcfe-b42d6eea2caa@gmx.at> <83h7l9d651.fsf@gnu.org> <83eegdd4uz.fsf@gnu.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="38469"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: acm@muc.de, 47207@debbugs.gnu.org To: martin rudalics Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Mar 18 10:44:58 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lMpD6-0009ow-MH for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 18 Mar 2021 10:44:56 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:57174 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lMpD5-00087D-Lp for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 18 Mar 2021 05:44:55 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:40808) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lMp7O-0001dy-Kw for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 18 Mar 2021 05:39:02 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:33533) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lMp7O-0007ix-BD for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 18 Mar 2021 05:39:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lMp7O-00040P-91 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 18 Mar 2021 05:39:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2021 09:39:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 47207 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 47207-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B47207.161606032215369 (code B ref 47207); Thu, 18 Mar 2021 09:39:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 47207) by debbugs.gnu.org; 18 Mar 2021 09:38:42 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:45079 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lMp74-0003zp-8D for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 18 Mar 2021 05:38:42 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:47664) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lMp70-0003zb-0w for 47207@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 18 Mar 2021 05:38:41 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:51739) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lMp6t-0007PK-12; Thu, 18 Mar 2021 05:38:32 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:4734 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1lMp6r-0005As-Um; Thu, 18 Mar 2021 05:38:30 -0400 In-Reply-To: (message from martin rudalics on Thu, 18 Mar 2021 09:43:57 +0100) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:202580 Archived-At: > Cc: 47207@debbugs.gnu.org, acm@muc.de > From: martin rudalics > Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2021 09:43:57 +0100 > > > I don't think I understand what's bothering you. The idea is simple: > > if you get a frame that's a tooltip frame, ask for another one. > > Like the below, I suppose. Something like that, yes. > ... but we don't even have `window-tooltip-p' yet. It's a one-liner, isn't it? I'm not even sure we need a function for that, but I won't object adding one. > >> Checking whether the returned frame is a tooltip frame in > >> `next-window-any-frame' means any Lisp code that does not do > >> something similar can crash Emacs. > > > > Crash how? > > As in my report. These were the only times I've been losing Emacs > sessions in the past years. If we didn't fix that yet, let's fix it ASAP. > > In any case, the idea that something applications might forget to do > > would mean we must push the checks to lower levels sounds wrong to me. > > Lower levels should be free from application-level constraints, so > > that if someone wants to write code which breaks those constraints, > > he/she could do that. > > Why did you decline the proposal to expose buffer markers to Elisp? How is that relevant to the present discussion? > > That those who do it must know what they are > > doing is a truism; restricting legitimate uses for fear of > > illegitimate ones is punishing the innocent for fear of the evil -- > > that's the problem with TSA, for example. > > We still have no concept for whether and where we would refuse > selecting a tooltip window - in `select-window', select_window, > `select-frame', wherever we set selected_window ... Then let's develop that concept. But again, how is this relevant to the issue at hand?