* bug#29048: 26.0.90; [PATCH] Improve documentation on Edebug and macros
@ 2017-10-29 1:01 Gemini Lasswell
2017-11-03 13:41 ` Eli Zaretskii
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Gemini Lasswell @ 2017-10-29 1:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 29048
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 629 bytes --]
Here are a few suggestions to try to make that dense section of the
manual on Edebug and macros a little clearer.
I'd like to remove mention of eval-when-compile from the explanation
of how to make sure macro specifications are available, because it's
not the only way to get yourself in that situation. If you navigate to
a function in a file that's not yet loaded which uses a macro in a
different file required by the first file and also not yet loaded, and
C-u C-M-x, Edebug will complain due to the lack of macro spec
regardless of whether the never-executed require in the first file was
wrapped with eval-when-compile.
[-- Attachment #2: 0001-Improve-documentation-of-Edebug-and-macros.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 3411 bytes --]
From 648f33d68218ac89d941eb78aa6f6d2934e6f97e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Gemini Lasswell <gazally@runbox.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2017 13:47:15 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] Improve documentation of Edebug and macros
* doc/lispref/edebug.texi (Instrumenting Macro Calls): Refer to
`require' instead of `eval-when-compile' in discussion of loading
macro specifications before instrumenting.
(Specification List): Clarify what "defining form" means to Edebug
and when `def-form' or `def-body' should be used instead of `form'
or `body'.
---
doc/lispref/edebug.texi | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++----------
1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/doc/lispref/edebug.texi b/doc/lispref/edebug.texi
index cebf0a3af3..e1c1e26bc5 100644
--- a/doc/lispref/edebug.texi
+++ b/doc/lispref/edebug.texi
@@ -1144,9 +1144,10 @@ Instrumenting Macro Calls
@c automatically load the entire source file containing the function
@c being instrumented. That would avoid this.
Take care to ensure that the specifications are known to Edebug when
-you instrument code. If you are instrumenting a function from a file
-that uses @code{eval-when-compile} to require another file containing
-macro definitions, you may need to explicitly load that file.
+you instrument code. If you are instrumenting a function which uses a
+macro defined in another file, you may first need to either evaluate
+the @code{require} forms in the file containing your function, or
+explicitly load the file containing the macro.
You can also define an edebug specification for a macro separately
from the macro definition with @code{def-edebug-spec}. Adding
@@ -1231,13 +1232,17 @@ Specification List
@c an "expression" is not necessarily intended for evaluation.
@item form
-A single evaluated expression, which is instrumented.
+A single evaluated expression, which is instrumented. If your macro
+wraps the expression with @code{lambda} before it is evaluated, use
+@code{def-form} instead. See @code{def-form} below.
@item place
A generalized variable. @xref{Generalized Variables}.
@item body
-Short for @code{&rest form}. See @code{&rest} below.
+Short for @code{&rest form}. See @code{&rest} below. If your macro
+wraps its body of code with @code{lambda} before it is evaluated, use
+@code{def-body} instead. See @code{def-body} below.
@item function-form
A function form: either a quoted function symbol, a quoted lambda
@@ -1292,11 +1297,16 @@ Specification List
@item &define
@c @kindex &define @r{(Edebug)}
-Indicates that the specification is for a defining form. The defining
-form itself is not instrumented (that is, Edebug does not stop before and
-after the defining form), but forms inside it typically will be
-instrumented. The @code{&define} keyword should be the first element in
-a list specification.
+
+Indicates that the specification is for a defining form. Edebug's
+definition of a defining form is a form containing one or more code
+forms which are saved and executed later, after the execution of the
+defining form.
+
+The defining form itself is not instrumented (that is, Edebug does not
+stop before and after the defining form), but forms inside it
+typically will be instrumented. The @code{&define} keyword should be
+the first element in a list specification.
@item nil
This is successful when there are no more arguments to match at the
--
2.14.2
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* bug#29048: 26.0.90; [PATCH] Improve documentation on Edebug and macros
2017-10-29 1:01 bug#29048: 26.0.90; [PATCH] Improve documentation on Edebug and macros Gemini Lasswell
@ 2017-11-03 13:41 ` Eli Zaretskii
2017-11-09 17:43 ` Gemini Lasswell
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2017-11-03 13:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Gemini Lasswell; +Cc: 29048
> From: Gemini Lasswell <gazally@runbox.com>
> Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2017 18:01:43 -0700
>
> Here are a few suggestions to try to make that dense section of the
> manual on Edebug and macros a little clearer.
Thanks, this is okay for the release branch.
> I'd like to remove mention of eval-when-compile from the explanation
> of how to make sure macro specifications are available, because it's
> not the only way to get yourself in that situation. If you navigate to
> a function in a file that's not yet loaded which uses a macro in a
> different file required by the first file and also not yet loaded, and
> C-u C-M-x, Edebug will complain due to the lack of macro spec
> regardless of whether the never-executed require in the first file was
> wrapped with eval-when-compile.
That's okay, but please mention eval-when-compile as an example of the
broader class of situations with instrumenting code wrapped with
macros.
> * doc/lispref/edebug.texi (Instrumenting Macro Calls): Refer to
> `require' instead of `eval-when-compile' in discussion of loading
> macro specifications before instrumenting.
In log entries and in NEWS, we use quoting 'like this' nowadays, not
`like this'.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* bug#29048: 26.0.90; [PATCH] Improve documentation on Edebug and macros
2017-11-03 13:41 ` Eli Zaretskii
@ 2017-11-09 17:43 ` Gemini Lasswell
2017-11-09 20:15 ` Eli Zaretskii
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Gemini Lasswell @ 2017-11-09 17:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Eli Zaretskii; +Cc: Gemini Lasswell, 29048
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 220 bytes --]
Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
> That's okay, but please mention eval-when-compile as an example of the
> broader class of situations with instrumenting code wrapped with
> macros.
OK, here's a revised version.
[-- Attachment #2: 0001-Improve-documentation-of-Edebug-and-macros.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 3509 bytes --]
From 4213f586b8207bc0529c664ada005bfc61acfa08 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Gemini Lasswell <gazally@runbox.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2017 13:47:15 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] Improve documentation of Edebug and macros
* doc/lispref/edebug.texi (Instrumenting Macro Calls): Improve
discussion of when it might be necessary to find and evaluate macro
specifications before instrumenting.
(Specification List): Clarify what "defining form" means to Edebug
and when 'def-form' or 'def-body' should be used instead of 'form'
or 'body'.
---
doc/lispref/edebug.texi | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++----------
1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/doc/lispref/edebug.texi b/doc/lispref/edebug.texi
index cebf0a3af3..62fd9f38cb 100644
--- a/doc/lispref/edebug.texi
+++ b/doc/lispref/edebug.texi
@@ -1144,9 +1144,12 @@ Instrumenting Macro Calls
@c automatically load the entire source file containing the function
@c being instrumented. That would avoid this.
Take care to ensure that the specifications are known to Edebug when
-you instrument code. If you are instrumenting a function from a file
-that uses @code{eval-when-compile} to require another file containing
-macro definitions, you may need to explicitly load that file.
+you instrument code. If you are instrumenting a function which uses a
+macro defined in another file, you may first need to either evaluate
+the @code{require} forms in the file containing your function, or
+explicitly load the file containing the macro. If the definition of a
+macro is wrapped by @code{eval-when-compile}, you may need to evaluate
+it.
You can also define an edebug specification for a macro separately
from the macro definition with @code{def-edebug-spec}. Adding
@@ -1231,13 +1234,17 @@ Specification List
@c an "expression" is not necessarily intended for evaluation.
@item form
-A single evaluated expression, which is instrumented.
+A single evaluated expression, which is instrumented. If your macro
+wraps the expression with @code{lambda} before it is evaluated, use
+@code{def-form} instead. See @code{def-form} below.
@item place
A generalized variable. @xref{Generalized Variables}.
@item body
-Short for @code{&rest form}. See @code{&rest} below.
+Short for @code{&rest form}. See @code{&rest} below. If your macro
+wraps its body of code with @code{lambda} before it is evaluated, use
+@code{def-body} instead. See @code{def-body} below.
@item function-form
A function form: either a quoted function symbol, a quoted lambda
@@ -1292,11 +1299,16 @@ Specification List
@item &define
@c @kindex &define @r{(Edebug)}
-Indicates that the specification is for a defining form. The defining
-form itself is not instrumented (that is, Edebug does not stop before and
-after the defining form), but forms inside it typically will be
-instrumented. The @code{&define} keyword should be the first element in
-a list specification.
+
+Indicates that the specification is for a defining form. Edebug's
+definition of a defining form is a form containing one or more code
+forms which are saved and executed later, after the execution of the
+defining form.
+
+The defining form itself is not instrumented (that is, Edebug does not
+stop before and after the defining form), but forms inside it
+typically will be instrumented. The @code{&define} keyword should be
+the first element in a list specification.
@item nil
This is successful when there are no more arguments to match at the
--
2.14.3
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* bug#29048: 26.0.90; [PATCH] Improve documentation on Edebug and macros
2017-11-09 17:43 ` Gemini Lasswell
@ 2017-11-09 20:15 ` Eli Zaretskii
2017-11-13 23:42 ` Gemini Lasswell
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2017-11-09 20:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Gemini Lasswell; +Cc: gazally, 29048
> From: Gemini Lasswell <geminilasswell@runbox.com>
> Cc: Gemini Lasswell <gazally@runbox.com>, 29048@debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Thu, 09 Nov 2017 09:43:01 -0800
>
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>
> > That's okay, but please mention eval-when-compile as an example of the
> > broader class of situations with instrumenting code wrapped with
> > macros.
>
> OK, here's a revised version.
OK, thanks. This is good to go.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2017-11-13 23:42 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2017-10-29 1:01 bug#29048: 26.0.90; [PATCH] Improve documentation on Edebug and macros Gemini Lasswell
2017-11-03 13:41 ` Eli Zaretskii
2017-11-09 17:43 ` Gemini Lasswell
2017-11-09 20:15 ` Eli Zaretskii
2017-11-13 23:42 ` Gemini Lasswell
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).