From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?UTF-8?Q?Aur=C3=A9lien_Aptel?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Dynamic loading progress Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2015 15:25:30 +0200 Message-ID: References: <55DB7C3D.4090106@cs.ucla.edu> <55DE75FD.8020308@cs.ucla.edu> <55F5DD8C.70506@dancol.org> <55F62C16.4000105@dancol.org> <55F64F04.9030002@dancol.org> <55F6E43E.9030502@dancol.org> <55F70C4E.8030805@dancol.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1443965141 25437 80.91.229.3 (4 Oct 2015 13:25:41 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2015 13:25:41 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Paul Eggert , Daniel Colascione , Emacs development discussions , Stefan Monnier , Tom Tromey , Stephen Leake To: Philipp Stephani Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Oct 04 15:25:40 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 1ZijIF-0003hd-LF for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 04 Oct 2015 15:25:35 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:42446 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZijIF-0007to-0d for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 04 Oct 2015 09:25:35 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45952) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZijIC-0007td-2w for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 04 Oct 2015 09:25:32 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZijIB-0008Rt-4z for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 04 Oct 2015 09:25:32 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-io0-x233.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4001:c06::233]:33976) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZijIA-0008QZ-VZ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 04 Oct 2015 09:25:31 -0400 Original-Received: by iow1 with SMTP id 1so124710780iow.1 for ; Sun, 04 Oct 2015 06:25:30 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=lQ1/Y9c5KtV50UsM4zup2uWj/V57LIAlJqxTl4yEE0Q=; b=LM4j9OuFogKU1cT6ekswBAqVHcPzu4zZyZEECgXL/pbjo7re5w7GQw4ws8EhmTrzde Ur6u1im4jHiupVyKDGGc86tWxM7tIDpzYijI6/iaxPHkGBlg/Za+YTnuNHaoF365wuGF uS/G7gw3fSwdpUXgIEMGEarRqLdAhwPZ6DTHGsJVyZmOA4RJunBt6Unp13WXe9tcybnB n/1NLqvA3o5IJO3tgReRnBbLFwE8YAxCCbnWblrErbyX0lh5JjROuR8gdhaI4fjtl3Iu NDhIZymoi1GwjVsfSE6zLzKTokAEK3vNTJe8m5waRW44Qz1J6owQGHcjCEj6/TFv28Yn UJQg== X-Received: by 10.107.136.88 with SMTP id k85mr22726805iod.135.1443965130235; Sun, 04 Oct 2015 06:25:30 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.36.146.193 with HTTP; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 06:25:30 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: X-Google-Sender-Auth: FjIiqHzvtfYE1ix2RFkjcCXS5nw X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2607:f8b0:4001:c06::233 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:190878 Archived-At: First of all thank you for actually contributing with code, Philip. Very much appreciated. On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 5:35 PM, Philipp Stephani wrote: > I have implemented this in a private fork: > https://github.com/phst/emacs-dynamic-module/commit/b14073ef8a522bdb90a8d7f0edc575edfd75da26 > Note that code is only a suggestion how it could be implemented. It deviates > from Daniel's design by using return parameters instead of TLS, but that's > only a minor difference. The important part is the addition of > protected_call_n to eval.c. I've looked at both branch. The one using an in-out return parameter looks really annoying to use though. I think I prefer the "minimal" implementation [1]. Using that version, we could add an unsafe_funcall() to the API that doesnt do any signal checking so that we have both. Stefan, is this enough? Or should we actually expose `condition-case' for finer-grained control? 1: https://github.com/phst/emacs-dynamic-module/commit/41a8cb8a1d29346331fcaf1f28b6c5bee8c8f6ad