From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.windows,gmane.emacs.bugs
Subject: Re: Current word on binaries
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:52:28 -0500
Sender: help-emacs-windows-bounces+gnu-help-emacs-windows=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Message-ID: <E1Ason6-0008Pd-8U@fencepost.gnu.org>
References: <009901c3ec70$b3013940$6400a8c0@austin.rr.com>
	<m3broc4fdc.fsf@ate.maierh> <m3n07m80ox.fsf@ate.maierh>
	<7494-Sat14Feb2004140608+0200-eliz@elta.co.il>
	<ud68hdfc0.fsf@jasonrumney.net>
Reply-To: rms@gnu.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org
X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1076961618 31016 80.91.224.253 (16 Feb 2004 20:00:18 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 20:00:18 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: help-emacs-windows@gnu.org, eliz@elta.co.il, harald@maierh.de,
	bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
Original-X-From: help-emacs-windows-bounces+gnu-help-emacs-windows=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Feb 16 21:00:12 2004
Return-path: <help-emacs-windows-bounces+gnu-help-emacs-windows=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173])
	by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
	id 1Asoua-0006qB-00
	for <gnu-help-emacs-windows@m.gmane.org>; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 21:00:12 +0100
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.24)
	id 1AsouK-0001ir-Oi
	for gnu-help-emacs-windows@m.gmane.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:59:56 -0500
Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.24)
	id 1Asoqo-0000Ma-Su
	for help-emacs-windows@gnu.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:56:18 -0500
Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.24)
	id 1AsoqE-0008Tw-Qx
	for help-emacs-windows@gnu.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:56:14 -0500
Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.24)
	id 1AsoqE-0008TN-2W; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:55:42 -0500
Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.24)
	id 1Ason6-0008Pd-8U; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:52:28 -0500
Original-To: Jason Rumney <jasonr@gnu.org>
In-reply-to: <ud68hdfc0.fsf@jasonrumney.net> (message from Jason Rumney on 14
	Feb 2004 12:18:39 +0000)
X-BeenThere: help-emacs-windows@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.2
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion forum for users of the GNU Emacs port to Windows
	<help-emacs-windows.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-emacs-windows>,
	<mailto:help-emacs-windows-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mail.gnu.org/pipermail/help-emacs-windows>
List-Post: <mailto:help-emacs-windows@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:help-emacs-windows-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-emacs-windows>,
	<mailto:help-emacs-windows-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: help-emacs-windows-bounces+gnu-help-emacs-windows=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.windows:2024 gmane.emacs.bugs:6981
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.bugs:6981

    Since it is deep within the byte code interpreter it is difficult to
    find what happened to get get the binding stack in that state.

You could disassemble the byte code and see if it is valid.
If it is valid, then debugging the byte code interpreter
might not be too hard.  One could determine what the stack
level should be at certain points in the function, and add
debugging code to test the actual stack level at those points.

One could also do this by adding a bytecode instruction to test
the binding stack level, and adding a flag to make the compiler
generate these instructions.  That would be a new debugging 
feature in the compiler.