From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Dynamic modules: MODULE_HANDLE_SIGNALS etc. Date: Mon, 04 Jan 2016 17:26:21 +0200 Message-ID: <83bn918ixu.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83mvu1x6t3.fsf@gnu.org> <567841A6.4090408@cs.ucla.edu> <567844B9.2050308@dancol.org> <5678CD07.8080209@cs.ucla.edu> <5678D3AF.7030101@dancol.org> <5678D620.6070000@cs.ucla.edu> <83mvt2qxm1.fsf@gnu.org> <56797CD9.8010706@cs.ucla.edu> <8337uuqsux.fsf@gnu.org> <5679DC83.70405@cs.ucla.edu> <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> <568988EE.3010205@dancol.org> <56899278.9000007@dancol.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1451921253 30604 80.91.229.3 (4 Jan 2016 15:27:33 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2016 15:27:33 +0000 (UTC) Cc: eggert@cs.ucla.edu, Emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Daniel Colascione Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jan 04 16:27:27 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 1aG72d-0001o0-9g for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 04 Jan 2016 16:27:27 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:45391 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aG72c-0000oa-JW for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 04 Jan 2016 10:27:26 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45655) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aG71b-00086c-6o for Emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 04 Jan 2016 10:26:24 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aG71W-0007vz-0U for Emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 04 Jan 2016 10:26:22 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:34601) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aG71V-0007vv-UD; Mon, 04 Jan 2016 10:26:17 -0500 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:3002 helo=HOME-C4E4A596F7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1aG71V-0001oM-87; Mon, 04 Jan 2016 10:26:17 -0500 In-reply-to: <56899278.9000007@dancol.org> (message from Daniel Colascione on Sun, 3 Jan 2016 13:28:24 -0800) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e 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:197579 Archived-At: > From: Daniel Colascione > Date: Sun, 3 Jan 2016 13:28:24 -0800 > > One question that neither you, nor Eli, nor Paul have answered is why we > would try to recover from stack overflow and not NULL deferences. > Exactly the same arguments apply to both situations. The difference should be obvious: stack overflow is not (necessarily) a bug, it is just an exhaustion of some resource. Like getting a NULL return value from memory allocation routines. Would you claim that getting a NULL from malloc also requires to "crash quickly and predictably"? No, I don't think so. > Emacs should report its own crashes somehow *generally*, probably with > Breakpad. Maybe. But given the current trend of removing more and more data from what report-emacs-bug sends, I rather doubt that many users would want to allow such reports.