From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: martin rudalics Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [Emacs-diffs] emacs-26 9bf66c6: Don't run FOR_EACH_FRAME when there's no frame left (Bug#29961) Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2017 19:17:01 +0100 Message-ID: <5A34119D.6000407@gmx.at> References: <20171215073120.7671.79446@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <20171215073122.52703204D3@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1513361859 23616 195.159.176.226 (15 Dec 2017 18:17:39 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2017 18:17:39 +0000 (UTC) To: Paul Eggert , Stefan Monnier , emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Dec 15 19:17:35 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ePuY9-0005p3-Ri for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 15 Dec 2017 19:17:34 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48016 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ePuYG-00027a-U5 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 15 Dec 2017 13:17:40 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:34232) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ePuY1-000261-J2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 15 Dec 2017 13:17:26 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ePuXw-0004l9-FS for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 15 Dec 2017 13:17:25 -0500 Original-Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.18]:52138) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ePuXw-0004kZ-5S for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 15 Dec 2017 13:17:20 -0500 Original-Received: from [192.168.1.100] ([46.125.250.80]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx003 [212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MXZbS-1eTqy62g3a-00WZHR; Fri, 15 Dec 2017 19:17:04 +0100 In-Reply-To: X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:84qpjerCDi/pZWpDkUOqANWHutjRCxrVsOroeiYouVwQRfZDndc MKToPDv7Gt4xc6OMaqZcxiBqahGZTowGRYG1f61Q9HxqpLPIBjUY5Z3oZSzPQNdWCFxXUVh quqc1NStxH3T/9Z28Q3gCgOiw+Fq5I33ineXJzkDupfY+s1KBRwmalD7J0z4UN9pDAZ7fro qk1clWCaUgqzRU/ZwIdlw== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:OdhkwaRxLDU=:iUn+j7TM0hi3QAt1PGqCRH gpA7Rpuzw+QnR9eolcfo0BxQ/9CjfZ3GrlRY/MJIwY3XPJs/mXdk6i08D+vcSh70AazrnIEPk h+ekGCW70oeEZWrHUuXQYArmKUytrKdc9JRmxw4XLuIZUElDSgp1R7yO6fQIoKsFy8hqG3IMZ RT9gM4LzhjzYCQWbHdQEN1X0qzPWGF6UQVO1DzOrk4VM3VtcTlcdsmUXrLryHYD7dW4XNYYCD wDconD1jeq/wXfVHvUQ0jgM3irB6JPDzIjhj8V9gEKgobDjA7jF2wnO8e0MMJj2vlPbPclsyN ogO17vMfiklNVYipLkNF4Ik9RK/ReuL99buT3ulF3V4EKaNuPGy3f/I0I+l04lCgpW5a0e5Mm tk7SQES9KqhBkpWJzSEJZcqroM2uzq/yK6H9GQ+It6ywt54Y0BBoDP0WhxhJ1EWjt9wFlFpTk d876BB6ImUz7TNmPvxulbglUH/k5Q/51cBhKI6bmWGnOH07eQl5wB+zbaJNpFqxkiKZF5VJNu Sdej8BmsNZZaA70sbT8QCOowWOKQM7xW7J/kuNkjOSDkH8DMdmNHp8uzsUpDTIHY+AlxwUcD3 kv28iVyloNnvqIjL48s3zM/UUCzgbpgF7L1j1plY3z69gj4GHWSCC2LJvc8Uh5JbGWaDCCzWv 3zfeKjshcJzEMo+oLH4KmJBT9NSiGITCJ48qP34hWI2qP1aheR0eqKwr09RsJHTvWz6FZntfl eTk9SQfoS9o5nh1RKRTEry5WaTYv88UbSVgHMdcTA1MF8qHyN88lgc5aJ5U4QGAemksVNm6J X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 212.227.15.18 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:221108 Archived-At: > That's a good idea. However, some calls to FOR_EACH_FRAME do assume > that frame-list is non-nil, while others don't. So when we remove the > eassume from FOR_EACH_FRAME, we should add it to callers that have > the assumption (otherwise --enable-gcc-warnings would sometimes > rightly complain). I installed the attached. I'm confused. How did you recognize the "callers that have the assumption"? What about the call in check_glyph_memory? martin