From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Multiple major modes Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 00:38:58 -0400 Message-ID: References: <466E7A93.3050705@gmail.com> <466E81AA.3030202@gnu.org> <466E9822.2050508@gmail.com> <466EAB9D.9020408@gnu.org> <466EEA71.2070700@gmail.com> <200706122014.l5CKEKV1021902@projectile.siege-engine.com> <200706190209.l5J29Csr010302@projectile.siege-engine.com> <200706251404.l5PE4dgc011720@projectile.siege-engine.com> <18059.52286.486779.619378@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1183696851 9600 80.91.229.12 (6 Jul 2007 04:40:51 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2007 04:40:51 +0000 (UTC) Cc: raman@users.sf.net, lennart.borgman@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, eric@siege-engine.com, jasonr@gnu.org, sdl.web@gmail.com To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jul 06 06:40:49 2007 connect(): Connection refused Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1I6fcc-00023a-3e for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 06 Jul 2007 06:40:46 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I6fcb-0003ww-IN for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 06 Jul 2007 00:40:45 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1I6fav-0002Zu-N5 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 06 Jul 2007 00:39:01 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1I6fau-0002ZH-Pq for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 06 Jul 2007 00:39:00 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I6fau-0002ZB-FR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 06 Jul 2007 00:39:00 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1I6fat-0007Mr-A2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 06 Jul 2007 00:38:59 -0400 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1I6fas-0006TI-5B; Fri, 06 Jul 2007 00:38:58 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from Stefan Monnier on Thu, 05 Jul 2007 10:49:16 -0400) X-detected-kernel: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:74375 Archived-At: I don't find advising difficult for debugging. I am surprised. Why not? Actually, the problem with defadvice (for me) is not when the advice is enabled, but when it's not because then there's no trace anywhere that the function you're looking at has a special relationship to some other piece of code elsewhere. They are two different problems. Enabled advice can cause confusion in debugging, because the function may not do what its source code says; that can cause confusion in debugging. Separately, changing the function can break code in advice of that function. Both of them can be real. I'm surprised that you think that only the latter one is important. When you change a function, often you would search for its callers to make sure you don't break them. That search would find advice for the function, as well as callers. Thus, I tend to think that the second problem won't be so bad. However, when debugging you are likely to need to look at lots of functions, and it would be a pain to have to search for advice for each of these functions.