From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: emacs master + org Wrong type argument: number-or-marker-p Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2022 04:28:29 -0400 Message-ID: References: <83bkt42ifq.fsf@gnu.org> <87a68ovw0b.fsf@posteo.net> <835yjc2c6f.fsf@gnu.org> <8335eg2ao9.fsf@gnu.org> <875yjbexde.fsf@posteo.net> <83zggn2a0c.fsf@gnu.org> <03AF0800-5252-429C-86BC-85DF9DF449F9@acm.org> <83tu6v27yh.fsf@gnu.org> <6F871C02-AC26-4B89-B64B-E9F4ACACDBE7@acm.org> <83sfmf26b6.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="13147"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/29.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: Gregory Heytings , Eli Zaretskii , philipk@posteo.net, silent2600@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Mattias =?windows-1252?Q?Engdeg=E5rd?= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Aug 02 11:34:34 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1oIoIL-0003Gk-T8 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 02 Aug 2022 11:34:33 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50232 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oIoIL-0004NO-0U for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 02 Aug 2022 05:34:33 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:38478) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oInGc-0006oq-V6 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 02 Aug 2022 04:28:44 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:62423) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oInGa-0005Uz-Jv; Tue, 02 Aug 2022 04:28:42 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 90554804FC; Tue, 2 Aug 2022 04:28:38 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 06FF980011; Tue, 2 Aug 2022 04:28:33 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1659428913; bh=pfLgsEwU2mfri9lU2nIQb/W4ntFLKxOmm9h6UosrX8U=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=B0EFo2oKYHnWuYDhqBPSrfXZFRgIVB6nIKiQPJ4oiYwn8MQf+FVPgc0+XIvHBfDyr 06vT3ZZhS32homMymPqB1dv9/FoRtpUWQiT/KgBLLbtISYmo0SsdTn2hov8tzu7fy6 vPJSwMgjvXw8DfeltrXXTxioUp8JZ9oZPFEvPtNjMtjv2qbSW5d58V0sspgnmcqNo3 mmczikKjvhN7U8ZnvX+Eqh+G2E/1NiT/1FkuHGlFM6yJyH0obFUHH9zh7OVdtRNzF8 wsJBmNyj0stWyXCawhFYjgkfXlHui6Whcl8oHD1LozbWCoeRost02Pao88BnEhWHtr +DvrcwSO5Fb6A== Original-Received: from milanesa (dyn.144-85-176-027.dsl.vtx.ch [144.85.176.27]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DD941120329; Tue, 2 Aug 2022 04:28:31 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: ("Mattias =?windows-1252?Q?Engdeg=E5rd=22's?= message of "Mon, 1 Aug 2022 20:47:04 +0200") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-Spam_score_int: -42 X-Spam_score: -4.3 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:292977 Archived-At: Mattias Engdeg=E5rd [2022-08-01 20:47:04] wrote: > 1 aug. 2022 kl. 20.06 skrev Gregory Heytings : >> Is it not allowed to specbind in a function and to unbind in its caller? > No, functions must be balanced with respect to the specbind stack. The > bytecode machinery assumes this to be the case. With some exceptions, of course, such as the `specbind` function itself, or the `record_unwind_protect_*`. I.e. functions which do nothing else than push something onto the specpdl. Stefan