From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#14062: 24.3.50; emacs_backtrace.txt Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2013 09:08:06 +0300 Message-ID: <83d2tv57p5.fsf@gnu.org> References: <75799AB3F22B457D85197F174077F208@us.oracle.com> <83wqstxrbo.fsf@gnu.org> <83fvzhxcdn.fsf@gnu.org> <8338vfyiy4.fsf@gnu.org> <838v4k6yc4.fsf@gnu.org> <516BF54E.9020802@gmx.at> <83y5cj6fo5.fsf@gnu.org> <516C2276.3020006@gmx.at> <83obdf69yz.fsf@gnu.org> <516C5358.8040709@gmx.at> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1366092533 27335 80.91.229.3 (16 Apr 2013 06:08:53 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2013 06:08:53 +0000 (UTC) Cc: lekktu@gmail.com, 14062@debbugs.gnu.org To: martin rudalics Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Apr 16 08:08:56 2013 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 1URz4X-0003kg-0B for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 08:08:53 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:33711 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1URz4W-0002Vl-72 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 02:08:52 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:39947) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1URz4S-0002VT-1h for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 02:08:49 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1URz4R-00015E-0p for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 02:08:47 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:49544) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1URz4Q-000158-TQ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 02:08:46 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1URz8Y-00016q-2c for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 02:13:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2013 06:13:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 14062 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs,w32 X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 14062-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B14062.13660927354056 (code B ref 14062); Tue, 16 Apr 2013 06:13:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 14062) by debbugs.gnu.org; 16 Apr 2013 06:12:15 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:53653 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1URz7n-00013M-6t for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 02:12:15 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout20.012.net.il ([80.179.55.166]:34003) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1URz7l-00013D-4o for 14062@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 02:12:14 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout20.012.net.il by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0MLC0010035OH400@a-mtaout20.012.net.il> for 14062@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 09:07:56 +0300 (IDT) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0MLC001IH3P6I810@a-mtaout20.012.net.il>; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 09:07:55 +0300 (IDT) In-reply-to: <516C5358.8040709@gmx.at> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il 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.x 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:73445 Archived-At: > Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2013 21:22:00 +0200 > From: martin rudalics > CC: drew.adams@oracle.com, lekktu@gmail.com, 14062@debbugs.gnu.org > > > But for nil, BUFFERP will return zero, and the code that uses XBUFFER > > should not be called, IMO. > [...] > > But the uninitialized contents field should be zero, no? Again, it > > should not pass the BUFFERP test. > > > > So the mystery still stands. > > You mean that the w->contents argument of XBUFFER _always_ passes the > BUFFERP test first and then fails at the assertion in XBUFFER? Yes, see the definition of the WINDOW_WANTS_HEADER_LINE_P macro, where we have: && BUFFERP (W->contents) \ && !NILP (BVAR (XBUFFER (W->contents), header_line_format)) \ Should a condition be always evaluated left to right? Or is a processor allowed to issue these two parts in parallel, if it has more than one processing unit available? > How can that make sense? Exactly my question. But the evidence is unequivocal: the assertion in XBUFFER is the one that aborts. I disassembled the code to make sure I got that correctly. This was an unoptimized build, so any tricks with folding several different calls into one don't happen.