From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Stefan Huchler Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: Strange eval behaviour Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2016 15:20:32 +0100 Message-ID: <87shqiwa4v.fsf@mail.de> References: <87vavrul0k.fsf@mail.de> <878tsl1p7b.fsf@mail.de> <878tshjyvy.fsf@web.de> <87shqo68ai.fsf@mail.de> <87lgwgl6kd.fsf@web.de> <878tsbxe40.fsf@mail.de> <8760ney2ml.fsf@web.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1479912355 8345 195.159.176.226 (23 Nov 2016 14:45:55 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2016 14:45:55 +0000 (UTC) Cc: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org To: Michael Heerdegen Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Nov 23 15:45:50 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1c9Yo2-0001hV-2g for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 23 Nov 2016 15:45:50 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:34288 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1c9Yo5-0000YZ-Ic for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 23 Nov 2016 09:45:53 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:34472) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1c9YPj-0005kE-Cl for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 23 Nov 2016 09:20:44 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1c9YPe-0000Lm-6z for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 23 Nov 2016 09:20:43 -0500 Original-Received: from shout01.mail.de ([213.128.151.216]:51390) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1c9YPd-0000JQ-Rd for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 23 Nov 2016 09:20:38 -0500 Original-Received: from postfix03.mail.de (postfix03.bt.mail.de [10.0.121.127]) by shout01.mail.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 490B1409BC; Wed, 23 Nov 2016 15:20:33 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from smtp03.mail.de (smtp03.bt.mail.de [10.0.121.213]) by postfix03.mail.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3283040008; Wed, 23 Nov 2016 15:20:33 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=mail.de; s=mailde201610; t=1479910833; bh=A+roHfylGhTVP3TAoUZAoVe8A4XfmZ9H0OMlfOqZEBE=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=Hr7MKdrsduolCXhvgUU9xVHUopMM9yFe5XFZ0WnsOH0Xz0l02R4CCJGrGBiQneN+J Lao+vF8JnydCWuJ7feyjWlTPcxnHYEb13NuVGq4/ZPFUUICccoPo//G+6dilXS7f56 IuRZjOtZzvrckUR0oIfUGgGjwo+nI8RElKl2qbiY= Original-Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp03.mail.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id ED2EC40EFD; Wed, 23 Nov 2016 15:20:32 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <8760ney2ml.fsf@web.de> (Michael Heerdegen's message of "Wed, 23 Nov 2016 10:19:46 +0100") X-purgate: clean X-purgate: This mail is considered clean (visit http://www.eleven.de for further information) X-purgate-type: clean X-purgate-Ad: Categorized by eleven eXpurgate (R) http://www.eleven.de X-purgate: This mail is considered clean (visit http://www.eleven.de for further information) X-purgate: clean X-purgate-size: 582 X-purgate-ID: 154282::1479910833-0000085D-3776A5D9/0/0 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 213.128.151.216 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "help-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:111774 Archived-At: Michael Heerdegen writes: > Stefan Huchler writes: > >> If code only throughs errors when you bytecompile it but not when you >> evaluate it, or run it, its hard to find the error. Aperently that >> happens with such macros like function*? > > What do you mean specifically? > > Of cause can running code produce errors. I have no problem if running code produces a error (a error message to be more prezise) but if it just silently fails, and just the re-evaluate fixes it, its kind of hard to find the problem.