From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Artur Malabarba Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Supporting multiline Package-Requires header Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2015 22:48:05 +0100 Message-ID: References: <87si7rjqmp.fsf@newcastle.ac.uk> <87fv3rjogj.fsf@newcastle.ac.uk> <87fv3po7ss.fsf@russet.org.uk> Reply-To: bruce.connor.am@gmail.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1439329711 24708 80.91.229.3 (11 Aug 2015 21:48:31 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2015 21:48:31 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Kaushal , Emacs developers To: Phillip Lord Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Aug 11 23:48:28 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 1ZPHPG-00087k-NH for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 11 Aug 2015 23:48:26 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:35971 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZPHPF-0005Pe-Rw for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 11 Aug 2015 17:48:25 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:58928) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZPHP2-0005PU-9V for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Aug 2015 17:48:13 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZPHOx-0004bG-FE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Aug 2015 17:48:12 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-la0-x232.google.com ([2a00:1450:4010:c03::232]:36255) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZPHOx-0004ZK-7v for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Aug 2015 17:48:07 -0400 Original-Received: by lagz9 with SMTP id z9so78572913lag.3 for ; Tue, 11 Aug 2015 14:48:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:reply-to:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=Xci3EjgQ9a3Qoqz/l0k1Tgqvpevw37C/MYt89PSjZjg=; b=1CXoyMhDtp+ao5qd5R+BF0mWWqGbq5UX6Kw6wEDFIXrlGNweKDc2p7zmEWlSY0EWco N4RVMJMANfB1AI2IM1R2I7LKBZ1tynfmEmz9S7Jhb+H3HtMp0MB8GssTB8oHle6W1BxM 53+tjKZm7M42aYeBfPkzGU4lXc1/4ixsaQ7W/nvQ1/dw9iepuPL3C1ac9nyoQCNdVnbg uESe5V1coMzBH3dhrcL8sglHlsVUJWUmdo7xD13k8tjcD7R9O8wgWAsOhJ5JIa81wkk9 cjC1WH0oilbSWjIXZVOfQriUXrpu/0DpafDnzIQ0VntW4i+jrTwp8NdUrokMWU7QiZ6i SFMA== X-Received: by 10.152.180.161 with SMTP id dp1mr11096623lac.21.1439329686079; Tue, 11 Aug 2015 14:48:06 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.25.134.139 with HTTP; Tue, 11 Aug 2015 14:48:05 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87fv3po7ss.fsf@russet.org.uk> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 8bpHl6rOMBWf_d5Lsd6OTcaZG5E X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2a00:1450:4010:c03::232 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:188738 Archived-At: >>> What is the failure behaviour of package.el for this at the moment? >> >> Package.el will signal an error during installation if it's not a >> valid sexp. The error itself will depend on what the problem is. >> Here's what you get if you miss a closing paren for instance: >> package-read-from-string: End of file during parsing > > My issue with this is that, iff I see this error, my first port of call > is going to be check-parens, and generally look for unbalanced parens in > the relevant file. And there are not going to be any, because in the > file, there is no invalid sexp. There is a commented out, pseudo sexp. > [...] > Just my thoughts, I will leave the issue in your hands from there. Thanks for the thoughts. I do think package.el could do better error reporting in these situations (and I might take that up too). That said, I don't think the proposed patch makes this situation any worse.