From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: emacs 25 broken? Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 05:45:13 +0200 Message-ID: <83385u7iye.fsf@gnu.org> References: <85wq37cidj.fsf@stephe-leake.org> <83h9ub6vm5.fsf@gnu.org> <85oaojc8q3.fsf@stephe-leake.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1424835988 16671 80.91.229.3 (25 Feb 2015 03:46:28 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 03:46:28 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stephen Leake Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Feb 25 04:46:19 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 1YQSvS-0006xM-Lu for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2015 04:46:18 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:52677 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YQSvR-00081O-NS for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2015 22:46:17 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:55448) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YQSuK-00069W-FL for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2015 22:45:09 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YQSuG-0003pj-Ep for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2015 22:45:08 -0500 Original-Received: from mtaout29.012.net.il ([80.179.55.185]:56896) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YQSuG-0003no-6i for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 24 Feb 2015 22:45:04 -0500 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.mtaout29.012.net.il by mtaout29.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0NKB005005T13E00@mtaout29.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2015 05:40:50 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by mtaout29.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0NKB00109682AY50@mtaout29.012.net.il>; Wed, 25 Feb 2015 05:40:50 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: <85oaojc8q3.fsf@stephe-leake.org> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 80.179.55.185 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:183478 Archived-At: > From: Stephen Leake > Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2015 15:15:00 -0600 > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > >> From: Stephen Leake > >> Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2015 11:46:32 -0600 > >> > >> Whenever I try to use emacs 25, something doesn't work right, and when > >> trying to debug it I always run into bug #19611; "e (current-buffer)" in > >> edebug returns the wrong buffer. > >> > >> Does anyone else see this problem? It's blocking all my work on master. > > > > Why do you need "e (current-buffer)" in Edebug so badly that it blocks > > your work? > > Seriously? If I can't trust the debugger, how am I supposed to make > progress? There's a large gap between "e (current-buffer)" shows something other than what you expect and "I cannot trust the debugger". There's nothing wrong with Edebug in general, so I don't see how that particular issue can block any work. FWIW, I use Edebug every day (and yes, I do see the same issue with current-buffer). > The real bug (in ada-mode) I'm trying to fix is in code that switches > buffers. (That bug does not exist when the same code is run in emacs > 24). Any expression I evaluate that relies on the current buffer is > wrong in the debugger, so it's impossible to figure out what's going on. You can always work around this. E.g., add a variable that gets assigned the buffer and look at it. Or even add a 'message' call that prints it. > I did not record in the bug that `with-current-buffer' is not broken; > executing M-x sal-debug gives the correct results. There you go.