From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: Dynamic loading progress Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 02:16:26 +0900 Message-ID: <22028.6378.473298.814646@turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> References: <86d1yirnqw.fsf@stephe-leake.org> <87si7977rs.fsf@tromey.com> <55DB7C3D.4090106@cs.ucla.edu> <55DE75FD.8020308@cs.ucla.edu> <55F5DD8C.70506@dancol.org> <87fv2hzmw3.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <22025.61338.681227.470671@turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <560AFCE3.8090802@lanl.gov> <22027.31797.6292.498407@turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1443684582 19515 80.91.229.3 (1 Oct 2015 07:29:42 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 07:29:42 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Paul Eggert , Daniel Colascione , Emacs development discussions , Philipp Stephani , Stefan Monnier , =?iso-8859-1?Q?Aur=E9lien?= Aptel , Tom Tromey , Stephen Leake To: "Herring, Davis" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Oct 01 09:29:41 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1ZhYJA-0005RE-UP for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 01 Oct 2015 09:29:41 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:39793 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZhYJA-0002r4-65 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 01 Oct 2015 03:29:40 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35755) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZhKzo-0002xC-MJ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Sep 2015 13:16:49 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZhKzj-0004YT-NW for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Sep 2015 13:16:48 -0400 Original-Received: from turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp ([130.158.96.25]:43074) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZhKzj-0004Y5-Ci for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Sep 2015 13:16:43 -0400 Original-Received: from steve by turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp with local (Exim 4.86) (envelope-from ) id 1ZhKzS-0005oo-OQ; Thu, 01 Oct 2015 02:16:26 +0900 In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: VM 8.0.12-devo-585 under 21.5 (beta34) "kale" 698a9aa86de4 XEmacs Lucid (x86_64-apple-darwin14.5.0) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: steve@turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 130.158.96.25 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:190525 Archived-At: Herring, Davis writes: > > We still have to catch the longjmp. The setjmp *is* the barrier > > as far as Fsignal and Fthrow are concerned. See > > unwind_to_catch(). > > The "struct handler" is the barrier: it's a detail of the current > implementation that it contains a jmp_buf (that is always used). > where (according to my straw-man code) catch->hook was populated by > the call to env->error_handle. It's still a non-local transfer, as > is necessary for the existing calls to unwind_to_catch to possibly > work. So what's the advantage over unwind_to_catch as implemented? You still need to put the barrier in place, only now you're using mixed idioms (Lisp for the pitcher, C++ for the catcher). That kind of thing always gives me hives. > > Which [...] is what I think is a horrible idea, akin to using > > `ignore-errors' in basic Lisp functions like `car'. > > But it's not ignore-errors: in my example, A-ah, that's *your* example. I was referring to what I believe Daniel and Philipp want, which was the idea you pretty much dismissed as "[too] inflexible": a handler hidden behind the API.