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: Sun, 20 Dec 2015 21:00:06 +0200 Message-ID: <83d1u1t07d.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83mvu1x6t3.fsf@gnu.org> <565779CD.80405@cs.ucla.edu> <83io4nuc68.fsf@gnu.org> <83poy1t927.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1450637997 518 80.91.229.3 (20 Dec 2015 18:59:57 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2015 18:59:57 +0000 (UTC) Cc: aurelien.aptel+emacs@gmail.com, tzz@lifelogs.com, eggert@cs.ucla.edu, dancol@dancol.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Philipp Stephani Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Dec 20 19:59:50 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 1aAjCv-00021F-VQ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 20 Dec 2015 19:59:50 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:41696 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aAjCv-00058G-6U for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 20 Dec 2015 13:59:49 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:36879) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aAjCr-00058A-R8 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 20 Dec 2015 13:59:46 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aAjCn-00034O-PI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 20 Dec 2015 13:59:45 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:43195) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aAjCn-00034I-Lt; Sun, 20 Dec 2015 13:59:41 -0500 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:4637 helo=HOME-C4E4A596F7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1aAjCl-0001fq-U3; Sun, 20 Dec 2015 13:59:41 -0500 In-reply-to: (message from Philipp Stephani on Sun, 20 Dec 2015 18:27:19 +0000) 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:196566 Archived-At: > From: Philipp Stephani > Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2015 18:27:19 +0000 > Cc: eggert@cs.ucla.edu, dancol@dancol.org, tzz@lifelogs.com, > aurelien.aptel+emacs@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org > > and did you make sure > that signaling an error from a module still reports the same > information and backtrace as before the change? > > No, but I wouldn't know how the patch should change this. It only changes an > implementation detail in the error reporting code of the module implementation > itself. I provided one such test here: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2015-11/msg02318.html and the resulting backtrace here: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2015-11/msg02405.html > If we wanted to check the backtrace, I think we should rather add a unit test > for it. That would be good, thanks.