From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Why is it so difficult to get a Lisp backtrace? Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2022 15:52:30 +0000 Message-ID: <YrcvPqDuQ6EWYSXN@ACM> References: <YrcQrLOk2WNfUAKR@ACM> <YrcpCuXd9eU0FLWO@ACM> <CADwFkmmFabrGebJiNt+vij40W4EP+LeBLCECMQN025=Z68i+bw@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="5249"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Emacs developers <emacs-devel@gnu.org> To: Stefan Kangas <stefan@marxist.se> Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Jun 25 17:53:58 2022 Return-path: <emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org> 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 <emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org>) id 1o586f-00016C-Rn for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 25 Jun 2022 17:53:57 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50558 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org>) id 1o586e-00034I-Ai for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 25 Jun 2022 11:53:56 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:60130) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <acm@muc.de>) id 1o585M-0002J4-3r for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 25 Jun 2022 11:52:36 -0400 Original-Received: from colin.muc.de ([193.149.48.1]:58197 helo=mail.muc.de) by eggs.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <acm@muc.de>) id 1o585K-0007EF-1A for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 25 Jun 2022 11:52:35 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail 24074 invoked by uid 3782); 25 Jun 2022 15:52:31 -0000 Original-Received: from acm.muc.de (p4fe15baa.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [79.225.91.170]) (using STARTTLS) by colin.muc.de (tmda-ofmipd) with ESMTP; Sat, 25 Jun 2022 17:52:30 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 6404 invoked by uid 1000); 25 Jun 2022 15:52:30 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <CADwFkmmFabrGebJiNt+vij40W4EP+LeBLCECMQN025=Z68i+bw@mail.gmail.com> X-Submission-Agent: TMDA/1.3.x (Ph3nix) X-Primary-Address: acm@muc.de Received-SPF: pass client-ip=193.149.48.1; envelope-from=acm@muc.de; helo=mail.muc.de X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham 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." <emacs-devel.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/emacs-devel>, <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel> List-Post: <mailto:emacs-devel@gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>, <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" <emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org> Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:291616 Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel/291616> Hello, Stefan. On Sat, Jun 25, 2022 at 17:30:30 +0200, Stefan Kangas wrote: > Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> writes: > > I mean something like the following, which to a first approximation, > > works. To use it, do M-x debug-next-command and the execute the > > command expected to give errors: > Good idea, but how about just making it into a manual toggle? I might > need to run more than one command to reproduce a bug. That's another idea. It has snags, like for example, you set the toggle, use it, and forget to cancel it. You then amend one of the controlling variables (like debug-on-quit) manually, then cancel the toggle, at which point confusion and irritation happen. One idea I had was to have an optional numerical argument, saying how many commands to leave the thing in place for. Yet another, conflicting, idea would be to have an optional boolean argument to exclude debug-on-signal from the mix, so as not to get too many "expected" backtraces. -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).