From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Daniel Colascione Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Dynamic modules: MODULE_HANDLE_SIGNALS etc. Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2016 12:34:02 -0800 Message-ID: <568AD73A.6080108@dancol.org> References: <83mvu1x6t3.fsf@gnu.org> <83oadhp2mj.fsf@gnu.org> <567AD556.6020202@cs.ucla.edu> <567AD766.3060608@dancol.org> <567B5DAB.2000900@cs.ucla.edu> <83fuyromig.fsf@gnu.org> <567C25B1.3020101@dancol.org> <56892FD6.8040708@dancol.org> <56894CE7.7090301@cs.ucla.edu> <568950C5.2030306@dancol.org> <56896359.4020309@cs.ucla.edu> <568966D4.5080707@dancol.org> <56898C6F.4010303@cs.ucla.edu> <56898EBD.2000000@dancol.org> <5689AA89.4030404@cs.ucla.edu> <5689AD48.4040902@dancol.org> <8337ud8iec.fsf@gnu.org> <568A9280.90803@dancol.org> <83egdx72hd.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="IxGF1atadBwNMDLqa2aBNWL74Lqudef0X" X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1451939658 13489 80.91.229.3 (4 Jan 2016 20:34:18 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2016 20:34:18 +0000 (UTC) To: Eli Zaretskii , eggert@cs.ucla.edu, Emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jan 04 21:34:15 2016 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 1aGBpX-0004fV-99 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 04 Jan 2016 21:34:15 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:47009 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aGBpW-0007pL-Kz for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 04 Jan 2016 15:34:14 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:43305) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aGBpS-0007pD-9e for Emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 04 Jan 2016 15:34:11 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aGBpR-0001zi-7y for Emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 04 Jan 2016 15:34:10 -0500 Original-Received: from dancol.org ([2600:3c01::f03c:91ff:fedf:adf3]:47783) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aGBpQ-0001zL-V9; Mon, 04 Jan 2016 15:34:09 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=dancol.org; s=x; h=Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From:References:To:Subject; bh=Wz1BgB6FtyZeh4x0WNz0qXBP0K6JgpaTCzpezXUwQPQ=; b=dYFWfvARFWgVfj99bP55iZ/EdA8htBZpsS4jAOPYzLjjF7JJPK4AEnUGA/vBH2qhvZxj9eIww1ilHQjv8xrMo3ZE0UzJBSr1zlVmLFCwM13Q5KGDLdTsstPZVIoPzxPfheqKecccWOOKMCSboT9/0McMcgu7RNfNqZqbuoxPEdoumZmiPe330C3uLY2WeXYAauOPLw3k+uxuW8RqhmjaIgjU66qEC9QGDU6+GC8ZyyESTXp465lQF7AqZfEWnhFi6+BG672zATmG/9D4GvTKL6iEQqeVZCysDmm0JJQZs01NPZiA4WIY9EUrk5+hbJtxszDdlNYpSOf/G3kJ2RJ7jw==; Original-Received: from [2620:10d:c090:200::8:1dbc] (helo=[IPv6:2620:10d:c083:10fb:2ab2:bdff:fe1c:db58]) by dancol.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aGBpP-0005qN-Us; Mon, 04 Jan 2016 12:34:07 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.4.0 In-Reply-To: X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2600:3c01::f03c:91ff:fedf:adf3 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:197626 Archived-At: This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --IxGF1atadBwNMDLqa2aBNWL74Lqudef0X Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 01/04/2016 12:32 PM, John Wiegley wrote: > OK, I've heard the concerns and input from all parties, and my decision= is > that we will include the stack overflow recovery logic, as it is now > implemented, while keeping our ears open for any problems this causes t= o > users. >=20 > Daniel, Eli, Paul, thank you for spending the time to be vocal and deli= berate > in enumerating your concerns. To Daniel specifically: I appreciate your= > experience in this area, and that you are not speaking from your imagin= ation, > but I'd like to give the current recovery approach a try before calling= it a > non-starter, or branching out into more complex solutions. >=20 > We *will* have the freedom to reverse this decision in a future release= if > things become worse rather than better. But there is no more benefit in= > debating this future. Thanks for considering the issue. I still think this decision does not bode well at all for Emacs robustness, and I'm terribly disappointed. --IxGF1atadBwNMDLqa2aBNWL74Lqudef0X Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJWitc6AAoJEN4WImmbpWBlKvoP/2CdluUoUWTRp6UTU82KLjB4 Lpslo23kDkiRJtxRsHqHHqCkC0ynIQWSyF0VisxiHcorwChuxjHetFs51XZ3ziwG GI2mBngLVzTudMubK2AaXcAFEoALSfJ1oRBpEbY+2KUySKtVquRpc0tMbXnGXzYx xY/EGRBcedy56tzd9SpkiXN8kIKFylnwbH0Mq7v70tfmGbHeDGHwagiRyk0U3J+w zBxwClY1CU2Yr2Akapsx/YKWA7KiPaIRqRQ1he4Ekdr8E9OMONgKDKJFQ8pdpEXP Ccvyg3x74hU/CoV/SRyBAblAlwTDM68QYy06QcEiNbMgNu5PwOjhqWOEiEc48wvB YqW7yti6JVUscPOrzcOzA4MbRUjBrr3RHp/3SgdQ7THt2NeQHpJaC+XNhSRAj61k hlNqXhbGIdGdWIonW9DufVIwTWJlPRd1SdlK72cyBg0BcLCYkxWXB0c6CTgaorcu sLgJaA4yEa4UBF3y04SeHvg1+1jyiaWH5+u6YA3TtqqnvamV4FfDmTmtckoXSbWy 0rCZMMlEyzUdttCYs1gn9L0mRej8FQ3lvqrr0N5BBk4PZAKuhJMoueouDE/a4hjs TFq9OPddjb2y06oiP+sm4GeEPpVmJ7bHbq9GqO4QiJd4DCcI0iW2nb7xEY+lQLaq LbnKYYdW+7NGCKVvo7bl =8fK0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --IxGF1atadBwNMDLqa2aBNWL74Lqudef0X--