From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?Q?Gerd_M=C3=B6llmann?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Question about last_nonminibuf_frame Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2024 16:52:47 +0200 Message-ID: <4BC65C49-C49C-4811-9CAB-85C493221CAD@gmail.com> References: <86cyqlbf95.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="37402"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Apr 19 16:53:56 2024 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1rxpci-0009SW-4E for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 19 Apr 2024 16:53:56 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rxpbu-0006hw-3V; Fri, 19 Apr 2024 10:53:06 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rxpbr-0006hC-KM for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 19 Apr 2024 10:53:03 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-ej1-x62f.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::62f]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rxpbp-0004FQ-Va; Fri, 19 Apr 2024 10:53:03 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-ej1-x62f.google.com with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-a51a1c8d931so228020766b.0; Fri, 19 Apr 2024 07:53:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1713538379; x=1714143179; darn=gnu.org; h=to:in-reply-to:cc:references:message-id:date:subject:mime-version :from:content-transfer-encoding:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=0QfuHho3qSKU1NP97waBR6yfeKa1sFny9SmSqz52jTo=; b=cxlyD4lT1/QRnDOQ/HCC0Ltgu9cU8n1gmnn3lY6SM12yqoyqhDEFBxlpOlHgS4hSt8 QvCOrc0mEbzxw0sQHoRAE/txmjPkYGGvPFimbRpyRMk2z7EoA5N4lvtZ2aYv9wu10dsP OUBFJzSI4G4HiPTg/gKZMErL0wM+i0SScQdxfQSgh2zmnbPvtKq6jToJ9nyirfniU00Z Y6xcFH1c2/9jt/1SU7j7wS8J+tQt96xSmwW+8SgSQ44PJ+NDPd5IA6fc4zOnf300SBM+ YbxwD6JxarCA5eaF3C1QTuID9rT4qxNVeeMWb9OnBRsbRpgHFVlmf2jn+Kk7p7v/1V1i 7n7A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1713538379; x=1714143179; h=to:in-reply-to:cc:references:message-id:date:subject:mime-version :from:content-transfer-encoding:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=0QfuHho3qSKU1NP97waBR6yfeKa1sFny9SmSqz52jTo=; b=N436ColD/h/Yg/o+iyawY9mi0wGWJ4w5SdM6LY3Rvc1qOB1Pb44S71L5QtbAEEtj6r zzM+C1iyA2t8eyonXuZEla3CZ+d5hhdgLsquYZtjGpVpU2qPDKo53kmoeUjPgidzyUrQ 9TeXc4DYpRdjIP9snFFLYyG9c9sKpFD1i+1qZ0yqWBaWOLxxCTBIkoUHtp0d9mUyM0vN G/pR7lSCuRf4LiaY79ksft5jpr06YSr1NurXWFgKNXIgnF4IIbDcc4MRE07NLmq09oxQ MfNbrrlj5yw26WyAlPHh+ndF6rpVSbdJER0qXBQSvht0Bh1SgOUql1Kg5UkOtIcZjoAl 5V8g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzsHgYtK4KDecGufYIyQLUtPpCRzJBJPU0Wyr6wOnq0QRjmpaM1 1cqE6EVRXZoPPCyDgRaK1xScIiwIHVNj2qcxHVhRa5Ysykrlla/9XRe1+zaD X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHoK+WDssJmYpdLOqi39rOl+kfaHsx16Qb8JzDlg75+gFuJAFoHFHjKyp6nwue20sP00aexIw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:4555:b0:a52:5460:a1d1 with SMTP id s21-20020a170906455500b00a525460a1d1mr1816066ejq.60.1713538378681; Fri, 19 Apr 2024 07:52:58 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from smtpclient.apple (pd9e3604d.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [217.227.96.77]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id cd9-20020a170906b34900b00a5264576138sm2279135ejb.35.2024.04.19.07.52.58 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 19 Apr 2024 07:52:58 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <86cyqlbf95.fsf@gnu.org> X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (21E236) Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::62f; envelope-from=gerd.moellmann@gmail.com; helo=mail-ej1-x62f.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:317845 Archived-At: Thanks Sent from my iPhone > On 19. Apr 2024, at 16:26, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >=20 > =EF=BB=BF >>=20 >> From: Gerd M=C3=B6llmann >> Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2024 14:26:18 +0200 >>=20 >> This variable of type struct frame * is not staticpro'd (it's not a >> Lisp_Objecz, so it can't be, technically. Strictly speaking, the >> variable can point to a frame that doesn't exist anymore, and can be >> passed to Elisp via a call to last-nonminibuffer-frame. >>=20 >> Question is: shouldn't something be done about this? >=20 > AFAICT, delete_frame makes sure last_nonminibuf_frame cannot be a > non-existent frame.