From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Problems with debug-on-entry in the Lisp debugger. Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 11:58:52 -0500 Message-ID: References: <87sm37n2bv.fsf@xs4all.nl> <87hdjnegak.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org> <876503wkh4.fsf@xs4all.nl> <87ll8yx8x5.fsf@xs4all.nl> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1110388398 24688 80.91.229.2 (9 Mar 2005 17:13:18 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2005 17:13:18 +0000 (UTC) Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Mar 09 18:13:18 2005 Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1D94f5-0006z7-AM for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 09 Mar 2005 18:07:55 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1D94tn-0002Og-C0 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 09 Mar 2005 12:23:07 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1D94rb-00011j-1y for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Mar 2005 12:20:51 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1D94rU-0000yz-8F for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Mar 2005 12:20:46 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1D94rT-0000p0-Rc for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Mar 2005 12:20:43 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1D94WL-0000ec-Bb for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Mar 2005 11:58:53 -0500 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.34) id 1D94WK-000677-TB; Wed, 09 Mar 2005 11:58:52 -0500 Original-To: Lute Kamstra In-reply-to: <87ll8yx8x5.fsf@xs4all.nl> (message from Lute Kamstra on Tue, 08 Mar 2005 19:57:26 +0100) 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 X-MailScanner-To: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:34381 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:34381 > does it have any real impact? It can be confusing for new users of the debugger: Hey, what's that doing in my function? Did I put that there? The user probably rembemers having set "debug on entry" for the function, and has just been reminded by entering the debugger, so that ought to help him understand. > If the aesthetic aspect is just more serious now that we replace > (debug 'debug) with (if (or inhibit-debug-on-entry > debugger-jumping-flag) nil (debug 'debug)), we can define a function > named e.g. `debug-entering' that will do the checking of > inhibit-debug-on-entry and debugger-jumping-flag. That would be somewhat better. Using the name implement-debug-on-entry will help the user figure out why it is there. the user to understand.