From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Declaring Lisp function types Date: Thu, 02 May 2024 09:16:54 +0300 Message-ID: <861q6koi09.fsf@gnu.org> References: <8634sdjgoj.fsf@gnu.org> <86mspaq4ro.fsf@gnu.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="35414"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: acorallo@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org, stefankangas@gmail.com, adam@alphapapa.net, arthur.miller@live.com To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu May 02 08:17:34 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 1s2Pl8-00091P-8b for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 02 May 2024 08:17:34 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1s2Pkz-0002FG-1w; Thu, 02 May 2024 02:17:25 -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 1s2Pkx-0002AR-31 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 02 May 2024 02:17:23 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1s2Pkw-00009F-JE; Thu, 02 May 2024 02:17:22 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=3BtZBguBNwoT3MXsh/8Id59DZPM5F2NsDVWNmNNsXw0=; b=Psd1GYhDYtIW CWKGWEORm/riLIQhTeOqe3xSlPIxeYDclt21uqsXfnLNjUFlrVqnT2U+YKa8R1RD5Y143glTlOhST Aho7tEP908ECDRuU8v4tW7C+sSLwE3UR84UBxQSN1SAP5o/5EhPY3BKkpEP/qjMSxUazTG0fM+ZyC SFq1bqdAPvtyvdQbBcQN7qb2DTSOObyhnlDn+N5U/S4syroZknr1xntTHStwlxTcP4H0Fbdu6ClcC TF6DAtKWtetkKB6Yp5aO5qRx708/uZ764loDG3jCyV1+oAPrDth/jm4CmlyBgUdiFky4YvawnRAOt pjDVyLI/ti97/9TRBojRWg==; In-Reply-To: (message from Stefan Monnier on Wed, 01 May 2024 17:06:47 -0400) 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:318533 Archived-At: > From: Stefan Monnier > Cc: Eli Zaretskii , emacs-devel@gnu.org, > stefankangas@gmail.com, adam@alphapapa.net, arthur.miller@live.com > Date: Wed, 01 May 2024 17:06:47 -0400 > > > Thanks, I think it should be more clear now. I don't think we want to > > be over specific there as what the implementation does when the > > 'promise' of the declaration is not respected might change in > > the future. > > I think we need to mention very explicitly if "segfault" is considered > a valid possible outcome or not. Definitely. As well as any other "drastic" examples of UB.