From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Andrea Corallo via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#46974: 28.0.50; [nativecomp] wrong-type-argument number-or-marker-p with native compiled code only Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2021 20:44:42 +0000 Message-ID: References: <6043d628.1c69fb81.dc872.e8e3@mx.google.com> <60444772.1c69fb81.64275.1ddd@mx.google.com> Reply-To: Andrea Corallo Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="29596"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: Erik Hetzner , 46974-done@debbugs.gnu.org To: Pip Cet Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Mar 07 21:45:32 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lJ0HL-0007aw-RQ for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 07 Mar 2021 21:45:31 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:37236 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lJ0HK-0004rg-Tx for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 07 Mar 2021 15:45:30 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:59346) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lJ0Gs-0004jJ-NH for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 07 Mar 2021 15:45:02 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:58301) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lJ0Gs-0003T1-Ei for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 07 Mar 2021 15:45:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lJ0Gs-0008LK-Cl for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 07 Mar 2021 15:45:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Andrea Corallo Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2021 20:45:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 46974 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 46974-done@debbugs.gnu.org id=D46974.161514988532028 (code D ref 46974); Sun, 07 Mar 2021 20:45:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 46974-done) by debbugs.gnu.org; 7 Mar 2021 20:44:45 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:41613 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lJ0Gb-0008KV-87 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 07 Mar 2021 15:44:45 -0500 Original-Received: from mx.sdf.org ([205.166.94.24]:61836) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lJ0GZ-0008KN-J1 for 46974-done@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 07 Mar 2021 15:44:44 -0500 Original-Received: from mab (ma.sdf.org [205.166.94.33]) by mx.sdf.org (8.15.2/8.14.5) with ESMTPS id 127Kiguk028983 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256 bits) verified NO); Sun, 7 Mar 2021 20:44:42 GMT In-Reply-To: (Pip Cet's message of "Sun, 7 Mar 2021 20:43:11 +0000") X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:201782 Archived-At: Pip Cet writes: > On Sun, Mar 7, 2021 at 8:33 PM Andrea Corallo wrote: >> Pip Cet writes: >> > Perfectly open question: how would you feel about adding LAP >> > reproducers for cases like this one, where it's hard to get at the >> > Lisp source? I think I've got the reproducer LAP code here, and it >> > shouldn't be too hard to write comp--native-compile-lap, but if you'd >> > prefer not to go that way I'm perfectly okay with it, too. >> >> I'm open to the idea of having a new way to stress the code in the >> testsuite, I'm a little doubtful this worth of, well certainly for this >> specific case where the patch is clearly correct. >> >> What's your feeling about this? > > I think this is going to be something we want eventually, but it's > harder than I thought, so I won't pursue this for now. Okay, lets keep it in mind for the future. Thanks Andrea