bug#43489: [PATCH] Don't signal scan-error when moving by sexp interactively

["João Távora" <joaotavora@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1107 bytes --]

On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 4:50 PM Mattias Engdegård <mattiase@acm.org> wrote:

> Let's hope the person debugging isn't too much bothered by typing M-:
(forward-sexp) instead of C-M-f, don't you think

Sure, just a modest +600% increase in keys typed :-)

> Tthere's nothing unusual about commands that use
> lower-level functions in their implementation and need to
> catch errors raised by those functions.

I disagree Mattias.  I think swallowing errors is bad, generally.
Swallowing errors because you wanted to change the way
they're textually represented is worse. It's fixing the problem
in the wrong place, simple as that. Simply because by
fixing the problem it creates a new one, however small
you deem it. These solutions never satisfy me.

But I personally hope _not_ to be terribly bitten by this. After all,
most of elec-pair.el is already done, and quite stable, so I haven't
been messing with this stuff for a while now.

Which reminds me...  Maybe you could just use
condition-case-unless-debug.  Then it will be
just textually ugly but not functionally so.

João

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1984 bytes --]