From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Rocky Bernstein Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Does recent great work on separating the bytecode stack make it easier to show bytecode offsets in a traceback? Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2022 12:25:48 -0400 Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000040983805dde19d3f" Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="5028"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" To: emacs-devel Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Apr 30 18:27:42 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1nkpwc-0001AG-IG for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 30 Apr 2022 18:27:42 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:46388 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nkpwb-00037L-GN for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 30 Apr 2022 12:27:41 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:50146) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nkpv1-0001ec-9a for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 30 Apr 2022 12:26:03 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-ed1-f44.google.com ([209.85.208.44]:38793) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nkpuz-0004j1-H8 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 30 Apr 2022 12:26:02 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-ed1-f44.google.com with SMTP id z99so12246236ede.5 for ; Sat, 30 Apr 2022 09:26:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=5aP7RhBQoxMExXgL0W2gNy4jMSCV4xik1Wom9wBvxnI=; b=Oz4EAiC7Ox7lqxacEXt6uA7pdYcl86obWPmhxpzYo8gIkzQNvWvFYuc/RNrAMEka8H lrraKJncXa/jy0mhtI+5KPv2ylGaEXZ1oEJt2HeNkO/5wudhu+o2GRNHc85zW9mmviCI nz2tePQh6eO9f9+/7QWuvX6UTjq3t7DfSGlNyVw8aXtCH0hgC163A1tUEODUq1ylUoF6 zjz11mOtKwcTQ2Uvd8O6Vk9BXTRvqdzlFiLylSEsqpWKmoyFLA1zo9tQeAhgvRrY8xdb GN9uOFJIooUY0rXWe661CmF9uNeGaB5GrPpRGMq07BSKC3DKmiyTavDm4diilECOvpiI eZzQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531G3mEAzGujIGwKugZOH7xvGTDejbMtZmJoBpHNvHJTy+U3b5sX y+LeLugz1C3xFhoejumNcSLnCCjWxSl/96AkSKd5a9sKLN8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzGeE/m57rWnBi4tufpo6GcOrPRise7pW1s0aRpm9Q+83lNcdB1ZzzZ2hPE1h0EmI4Ynk/HgVA9bnFcXM4vgjk= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:35c3:b0:423:f765:4523 with SMTP id z3-20020a05640235c300b00423f7654523mr5035590edc.311.1651335959187; Sat, 30 Apr 2022 09:25:59 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.208.44; envelope-from=rocky.bernstein@gmail.com; helo=mail-ed1-f44.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -13 X-Spam_score: -1.4 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.4 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.249, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:289064 Archived-At: --00000000000040983805dde19d3f Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I recently compiled GNU Emacs master (29.0.50ish) and saw the great work done to separate the bytecode stack. In this thread https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2022-03/msg00330.html I see a lot of concerns, but no thanks. So thanks Mattias Engdeg=C3=A5rd! I especially like and appreciate the comment in the C code in bytecode.c showing the Bytecode interpreter stack. Now that we have a more normal bytecode stack, we have "saved_pc" shouldn't it be possible to easily show the bytecode offset in lisp/emacs-lisp/backtrack.el ? Prior work on this can be found in https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2020-07/msg00711.html Thanks again. --00000000000040983805dde19d3f Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I recently compiled GNU Emacs master (29.0.50ish) and saw = the great work done to separate the bytecode stack. In this thread=C2=A0https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2022-03/msg00330.html= I see a lot of concerns, but no thanks.

So thanks=C2=A0= Mattias E= ngdeg=C3=A5rd!=C2=A0=C2=A0

I especia= lly like and appreciate=C2=A0the comment in the C code in bytecode.c showin= g the Bytecode interpreter stack.

Now that we have a m= ore normal bytecode stack, we have "saved_pc"=C2=A0 shouldn't= it be possible to easily show the bytecode offset in lisp/emacs-lisp/backt= rack.el ?=C2=A0


Thanks again.=C2=A0

--00000000000040983805dde19d3f--