From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Tom Tromey Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Dynamic loading progress Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 21:05:15 -0600 Message-ID: <87zizeme8k.fsf@tromey.com> References: <83sie7un20.fsf@gnu.org> <54E0D181.2080802@dancol.org> <83r3trulse.fsf@gnu.org> <54E0D7E0.305@87.69.4.28> <83h9unukbg.fsf@gnu.org> <54E0DEF8.7020901@dancol> <83egpruiyp.fsf@gnu.org> <54E0FF93.2000104@dancol.org> <5610ED13.1010406@dancol.org> <56117F37.9060808@dancol.org> <56259FDD.8040401@dancol.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1445310353 10564 80.91.229.3 (20 Oct 2015 03:05:53 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 03:05:53 +0000 (UTC) Cc: =?utf-8?Q?Aur=C3=A9lien?= Aptel , Philipp Stephani , Stephen Leake , Eli Zaretskii , Emacs development discussions To: Daniel Colascione Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Oct 20 05:05:41 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 1ZoNF5-0006JT-DV for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 20 Oct 2015 05:05:39 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:43298 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZoNF4-0004FW-FD for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 23:05:38 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:51190) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZoNF0-0004D7-AQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 23:05:35 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZoNEv-0005ij-As for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 23:05:34 -0400 Original-Received: from gproxy7-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com ([70.40.196.235]:52375) by eggs.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZoNEv-0005iP-1u for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 23:05:29 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail 19324 invoked by uid 0); 20 Oct 2015 03:05:26 -0000 Original-Received: from unknown (HELO cmgw3) (10.0.90.84) by gproxy7.mail.unifiedlayer.com with SMTP; 20 Oct 2015 03:05:26 -0000 Original-Received: from box522.bluehost.com ([74.220.219.122]) by cmgw3 with id XM5K1r0082f2jeq01M5Nj9; Tue, 20 Oct 2015 03:05:25 -0600 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.1 cv=Zs1+dbLG c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=GsOEXm/OWkKvwdLVJsfwcA==:117 a=GsOEXm/OWkKvwdLVJsfwcA==:17 a=cNaOj0WVAAAA:8 a=f5113yIGAAAA:8 a=zstS-IiYAAAA:8 a=PnD2wP_eR3oA:10 a=_emWc-O_5N4A:10 a=5lJygRwiOn0A:10 a=xL5hWtHj5tT0JXiBSqUA:9 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tromey.com; s=default; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:Date:References:Subject:Cc:To:From; bh=DocZD9NkaBi9emANqjuqJfspgJqRHSmLlEbJOhmEqZE=; b=qYfQIlT+m6Ucp5cyA/FFPKHpdMIeIw9PPAN/htWP2dIih/CvnFHKvfL4AKhQnoDetMkNuu/8MaBRM3f2vq1U/IZGtQo8YPaq0I6cN9OFPedO3MncMebhwWc+OjP3AgKu; Original-Received: from [65.128.79.106] (port=53373 helo=bapiya) by box522.bluehost.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1ZoNEm-0000cL-MZ; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 21:05:20 -0600 X-Attribution: Tom In-Reply-To: <56259FDD.8040401@dancol.org> (Daniel Colascione's message of "Mon, 19 Oct 2015 18:58:53 -0700") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-Identified-User: {36111:box522.bluehost.com:elynrobi:tromey.com} {sentby:smtp auth 65.128.79.106 authed with tom+tromey.com} X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 70.40.196.235 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:192144 Archived-At: Daniel> Yes, we do. I'd prefer eq, since the definition will never change, and Daniel> having a nice convenient way to access eq is useful in more situations Daniel> than a specialized test for eq nil. Both are useful and it is cheap to provide a method, so why not have both eq and nilp? Daniel> Maybe we should actually get rid of get_environment and rely entirely on Daniel> passed-in environment objects. It simplifies the API and avoids Daniel> definitional problems. Yeah, I brought this up earlier and I still don't understand the reason for the runtime/environment split. >> 4. Some of the function (free_global_ref, the int/float extractors) >> don't return emacs_value and have no clear way to signal an error. >> For these function the caller always has to use >> check_error/get_error. Is that good enough? Daniel> free_global_ref, like all resource-releasing functions, should be Daniel> infallible. For other functions, asking users to check the error state Daniel> after a call is fine, although we should also return reasonable dummy Daniel> values (0 and NaN, probably) as well in case they don't. It might be handy if there was a special emacs_value meaning that an error occurred. Tom