Re: Reporting Lisp errors in dynamic modules

[Philipp Stephani <p.stephani2@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1062 bytes --]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> schrieb am Fr., 27. Nov. 2015 um 18:40 Uhr:

> > From: Philipp Stephani <p.stephani2@gmail.com>
> > Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2015 16:40:23 +0000
> > Cc: aurelien.aptel+emacs@gmail.com, tzz@lifelogs.com, dancol@dancol.org
> >
> >     I believe the line with "<subr module-call>" is suboptimal, in that
> it
> >     looks alien and includes all kinds of unneeded and weirdly formatted
> >     data. AFAIU, the reason is that we deliberately unintern module-call.
> >     Should we perhaps reconsider that decision, so that the backtrace is
> >     in more familiar form? What exactly are the dangers of having
> >     module-call exposed as any other primitive?
> >
> >
> > - Somebody calls it with the wrong type. Right now it doesn't do any type
> > checking, so that would crash/be UB.
>
> We can add checks to countermand that.
>
> > - An existing function outside of Emacs might already be called like
> that.
>
> Not really a problem, IMO.
>

We could rename the function to "internal-module-call" to make it even less
likely to clash.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1721 bytes --]