From: Phillip Lord <phillip.lord@russet.org.uk>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Cc: acm@muc.de, larsi@gnus.org, Noam Postavsky <npostavs@gmail.com>,
40992@debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#40992: 27.0.90; Evaluating a function while using edebug breaks
Date: Sat, 02 May 2020 22:54:52 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <875zde3sur.fsf@russet.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <83wo5uu81f.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Sat, 02 May 2020 10:10:04 +0300")
Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>> From: Noam Postavsky <npostavs@gmail.com>
>> Date: Fri, 01 May 2020 23:05:32 -0400
>> Cc: Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de>, 40992@debbugs.gnu.org,
>> Phillip Lord <phillip.lord@russet.org.uk>
>>
>> > I think that sounds like a good solution on master, but the patch that
>> > introduced this should probably be reverted on emacs-27 -- it wasn't a
>> > bug fix, but a new feature, so reverting it should be safe, I think.
>>
>> I don't understand; the fix looks trivial to me (leaving out
>> indentation), and only touches a new function. Surely this is okay for
>> emacs-27?
>
> If this fixes the problem, it's okay for emacs-27. But then why did
> Alan say there was no easy solution?
I guess it's because the edebug should really still be using the overlay
information for the function it is still stepping through.
When I do this, it's because I do not want the function instrumented any
more; I'd probably be just as happy if edebug dropped out at this point
(i.e. stopped stepping through and continued). That I can step through a
function definition that is no longer instrumented is not really a
feature for me.
Not having it error, clearly, is a feature!
Thanks all for looking at this.
Phil
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-05-02 21:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-05-01 8:26 bug#40992: 27.0.90; Evaluating a function while using edebug breaks Phillip Lord
2020-05-01 15:56 ` Alan Mackenzie
2020-05-01 17:33 ` Alan Mackenzie
2020-05-01 18:02 ` Eli Zaretskii
2020-05-02 1:43 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2020-05-02 3:05 ` Noam Postavsky
2020-05-02 7:10 ` Eli Zaretskii
2020-05-02 13:34 ` Alan Mackenzie
2020-05-02 13:57 ` Eli Zaretskii
2020-05-03 11:55 ` Alan Mackenzie
2020-05-03 12:13 ` Alan Mackenzie
2020-05-02 21:54 ` Phillip Lord [this message]
2020-05-11 20:16 ` Alan Mackenzie
2020-05-02 13:14 ` Alan Mackenzie
2020-05-04 1:27 ` Pouar Dragon
2020-05-04 18:34 ` Alan Mackenzie
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=875zde3sur.fsf@russet.org.uk \
--to=phillip.lord@russet.org.uk \
--cc=40992@debbugs.gnu.org \
--cc=acm@muc.de \
--cc=eliz@gnu.org \
--cc=larsi@gnus.org \
--cc=npostavs@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).