From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lennart Borgman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Beeping Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 00:15:04 +0100 Message-ID: References: <912155b0911230837i48326730m82e0d54d4004be59@mail.gmail.com> <87zl6dgjt1.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <874oolarvt.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87aay91k9j.fsf_-_@mail.jurta.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1259363812 4732 80.91.229.12 (27 Nov 2009 23:16:52 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2009 23:16:52 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Juri Linkov , Chong Yidong , =?UTF-8?Q?Per_Starb=C3=A4ck?= , Giuseppe Scrivano , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Nov 28 00:16:44 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1NEA3N-0002lf-HR for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 28 Nov 2009 00:16:41 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52218 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NEA3N-0000lZ-1j for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 27 Nov 2009 18:16:41 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NEA2H-0008QQ-1b for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 27 Nov 2009 18:15:33 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NEA2B-0008ME-Oh for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 27 Nov 2009 18:15:32 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=35882 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NEA2A-0008Lc-MK for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 27 Nov 2009 18:15:26 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-yx0-f175.google.com ([209.85.210.175]:57444) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NEA29-00066W-EC; Fri, 27 Nov 2009 18:15:25 -0500 Original-Received: by yxe5 with SMTP id 5so1919632yxe.24 for ; Fri, 27 Nov 2009 15:15:24 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=NcCg6hNj3FdjAeps0+3/mg7VP63StZVhW3Nm4aSPVfM=; b=vw+sA6lr0wguo17etcRcYIfheVsFtCC9TpPqJoJSxc+phKQ7VSrhEdZ5tjrJ/GcjPW CvgCdS2TWftv8yEOuAuafn2GJufCB6bXXrdVuP2rxk5+spboz5534e3185xXasZ8t/Lc QbXz7dCbvMSgD8e6H3hHYq9N5sjpoNdsrLtaU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; b=iMZoeRXKxFNONqZmCn+z9z/dAtOQQrjanQu8TaAb3Rcahwpk83RgpR2/Tr11oxyoRN XpOPmR4xtVE7YJxVoh6MQSTDZ2c9RpcRwGYUIO8/X3iiGq+sfd5QmH1IdTmwB0+fsI2n sG7ZWklA1w9XDuwxtTWnxbEpM6CXrZqoa/b5E= Original-Received: by 10.101.170.11 with SMTP id x11mr874658ano.109.1259363724202; Fri, 27 Nov 2009 15:15:24 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) 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:117886 Archived-At: On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 12:12 AM, Stefan Monnier wrote: >>> That's a problem between windmove and debug-ignored-errors. >>> BTW, I'd welcome a patch that introduces a new error `user-error' and >>> then changes calls to `error' where the error message is in >>> debug-ignored-errors to signal `user-error' instead. >> You mean that debug-ignored-errors should just be '(user-error)? > > Pretty much, yes. Ok. >> Isn't there still a problem with condition-case then? Or perhaps it >> could be tamed to pass on user-error? > > I don't know what problem you're thinking of. That the intention is going to top-level and condition-case might stop it. But I do not know what is best to do. user-error will really fit best in command functions. It those are called by other functions the semantics is a bit hard to define (or at least use).