From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lars Ingebrigtsen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#6991: Please keep bytecode out of *Backtrace* buffers Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2016 14:43:00 +1030 Message-ID: <8760xalrjn.fsf@gnus.org> References: <8739tm9vzl.fsf@jidanni.org> <87vb5ct1lz.fsf@gnus.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1456546462 2129 80.91.229.3 (27 Feb 2016 04:14:22 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2016 04:14:22 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Juanma Barranquero , John Wiegley , Stefan Monnier , 6991@debbugs.gnu.org, 6991-done@debbugs.gnu.org To: John Wiegley Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Feb 27 05:14:11 2016 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 1aZWGh-0007ky-Fm for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 27 Feb 2016 05:14:11 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:53275 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aZWGg-0002HE-G7 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 26 Feb 2016 23:14:10 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35424) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aZWGc-0002Gv-DS for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Feb 2016 23:14:07 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aZWGZ-0004UE-7R for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Feb 2016 23:14:06 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:50975) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aZWGZ-0004U9-4T for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Feb 2016 23:14:03 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aZWGZ-0000hi-16 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Feb 2016 23:14:03 -0500 Resent-From: Lars Ingebrigtsen Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-To: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2016 04:14:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: cc-closed 6991 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch Mail-Followup-To: 6991@debbugs.gnu.org, larsi@gnus.org, jidanni@jidanni.org Original-Received: via spool by 6991-done@debbugs.gnu.org id=D6991.14565464172625 (code D ref 6991); Sat, 27 Feb 2016 04:14:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 6991-done) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Feb 2016 04:13:37 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48092 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aZWG9-0000gG-B2 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 26 Feb 2016 23:13:37 -0500 Original-Received: from hermes.netfonds.no ([80.91.224.195]:53454) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aZWG8-0000g5-2e; Fri, 26 Feb 2016 23:13:36 -0500 Original-Received: from [175.103.25.178] (helo=mouse) by hermes.netfonds.no with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1aZWFe-000213-Vf; Sat, 27 Feb 2016 05:13:07 +0100 In-Reply-To: (John Wiegley's message of "Fri, 26 Feb 2016 16:52:52 -0800") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1.50 (gnu/linux) X-MailScanner-ID: 1aZWFe-000213-Vf MailScanner-NULL-Check: 1457151187.83406@1WCNZN0jaZ70r5NU+BifkA X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 208.118.235.43 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:113929 Archived-At: John Wiegley writes: >>>>>> Drew Adams writes: > >> What's more, _users_ currently do the work by hand, so it must be possible >> to at least partly (probably fully) get it done by program. If users can >> manually (time-consuming and error-prone) redact the byte-code when pasting >> a backtrace into a mail etc. then that can be done by program. > > Drew, can you show me what it will look like to have the elision performed? > Sometimes the byte-code contains strings that give me a clue as to the > problem, so I'm wondering what will disappear if this is fixed. I thought the post I made yesterday showed the difference? And it's that the byte codes themselves get replaced by "....", and not the symbols (etc.) that are useful for figuring out backtraces. But the patch was backwards -- it inhibited it outside of backtraces instead of in backtraces. -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no