From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Herbert Euler" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Max-specpdl-size Bug in Emacs Lisp Interpreter? Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:11:13 +0800 Message-ID: References: <200604190403.k3J43PI3010087@jane.dms.auburn.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1145423524 29281 80.91.229.2 (19 Apr 2006 05:12:04 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 05:12:04 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Apr 19 07:12:02 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FW4ym-0006ix-Aw for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 19 Apr 2006 07:11:52 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FW4yl-00018v-NX for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 19 Apr 2006 01:11:51 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FW4yD-0000qr-QA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Apr 2006 01:11:17 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FW4yB-0000nP-KH for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Apr 2006 01:11:17 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FW4yB-0000my-Bg for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Apr 2006 01:11:15 -0400 Original-Received: from [64.4.26.29] (helo=hotmail.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1FW4zD-0002Lj-Bh for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Apr 2006 01:12:19 -0400 Original-Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue, 18 Apr 2006 22:11:14 -0700 Original-Received: from 64.4.26.200 by by112fd.bay112.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed, 19 Apr 2006 05:11:13 GMT X-Originating-IP: [84.19.182.23] X-Originating-Email: [herberteuler@hotmail.com] X-Sender: herberteuler@hotmail.com In-Reply-To: <200604190403.k3J43PI3010087@jane.dms.auburn.edu> Original-To: teirllm@dms.auburn.edu X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Apr 2006 05:11:14.0156 (UTC) FILETIME=[AE3052C0:01C6636F] X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:53057 Archived-At: >From: Luc Teirlinck >To: herberteuler@hotmail.com >CC: emacs-devel@gnu.org, miles@gnu.org >Subject: Re: Max-specpdl-size Bug in Emacs Lisp Interpreter? >Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 23:03:25 -0500 (CDT) > >Guanpeng Xu wrote: > > I agree. I think it would be better if this information appears > not only in elisp manual, but also in docstring of > 'max-specpdl-size' as well, if the increment cannot be avoided. > >I now see that with "this information" you meant that entry to the >Lisp debugger increases the value. It would do no harm to mention >this it the docstring. However, I believe that the current docstring >already makes clear that `max-specpdl-size' is no hard limit. If you mean "However, if you increase it too far, Emacs could run out of memory trying to make the stack bigger." make "no hard limit" clear, I don't agree. Who will know what the connection between 'max-specpdl-size' and stack is without reading source and/or without reading elisp manual? Perhaps even reading elisp manual is insufficient. Regards, Guanpeng Xu _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/