From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Paul Eggert Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Dynamic modules: emacs-module.c and signaling errors Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2015 13:20:46 -0800 Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department Message-ID: <565777AE.6030204@cs.ucla.edu> References: <83k2p7xk13.fsf@gnu.org> <87wpt7p369.fsf@tromey.com> <83d1uzxgvw.fsf@gnu.org> <5654D7CF.90001@cs.ucla.edu> <87si3vox7j.fsf@tromey.com> <56555B52.3030703@cs.ucla.edu> <837fl6xa02.fsf@gnu.org> <5655F10D.9080805@cs.ucla.edu> <83vb8ovkc5.fsf@gnu.org> <83a8q0vgb9.fsf@gnu.org> <83si3stuzn.fsf@gnu.org> <83poywtsxl.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1448572875 6399 80.91.229.3 (26 Nov 2015 21:21:15 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2015 21:21:15 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii , Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Nov 26 22:21:01 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 1a23yO-00070R-Aa for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 26 Nov 2015 22:21:00 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:53200 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a23yQ-0005cK-Pw for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 26 Nov 2015 16:21:02 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49430) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a23yN-0005bp-HK for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Nov 2015 16:21:00 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a23yM-0005TL-OO for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Nov 2015 16:20:59 -0500 Original-Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([131.179.128.68]:47740) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a23yH-0005Ry-3L; Thu, 26 Nov 2015 16:20:53 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E0EF160D27; Thu, 26 Nov 2015 13:20:51 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.cs.ucla.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id 4eobtCiTw911; Thu, 26 Nov 2015 13:20:50 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC55A160D96; Thu, 26 Nov 2015 13:20:50 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at zimbra.cs.ucla.edu Original-Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.cs.ucla.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id QsV8cUYSkmZn; Thu, 26 Nov 2015 13:20:50 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from [192.168.1.9] (pool-100-32-155-148.lsanca.fios.verizon.net [100.32.155.148]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8CBEE160D27; Thu, 26 Nov 2015 13:20:50 -0800 (PST) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 In-Reply-To: <83poywtsxl.fsf@gnu.org> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 131.179.128.68 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:195319 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii wrote: > It's not obvious to me, sorry. The costs of the current code are > minimal, and the advantages to have the "raw" functionality in > addition to what we have aren't clear-cut. My admittedly vague impression is that Stefan's approach would be friendlier to module authors who want to write code that feels like Emacs's current C code. This should be a plus, no? I don't fully understand why the current emacs-module.c is as complicated as it is, to be honest. I know it has something to do with C++ exception handling, but the details still escape me. But really, we should support C modules well too, as C is still the lingua franca for low-level software integration. And "well" does not mean "every time you call a function you then have to call some other function to see whether the first function worked".