From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Paul Eggert Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [Emacs-diffs] emacs-26 9bf66c6: Don't run FOR_EACH_FRAME when there's no frame left (Bug#29961) Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2017 11:09:32 -0800 Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department Message-ID: References: <20171215073120.7671.79446@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <20171215073122.52703204D3@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <5A34119D.6000407@gmx.at> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1513365025 18340 195.159.176.226 (15 Dec 2017 19:10:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2017 19:10:25 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.5.0 To: martin rudalics , Stefan Monnier , emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Dec 15 20:10:18 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ePvNB-00047B-SF for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 15 Dec 2017 20:10:17 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48240 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ePvNE-0003TB-2Q for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 15 Dec 2017 14:10:20 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53163) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ePvMd-0003St-9k for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 15 Dec 2017 14:09:44 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ePvMa-0001HN-4N for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 15 Dec 2017 14:09:43 -0500 Original-Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([131.179.128.68]:44932) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ePvMZ-0001CR-Sr for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 15 Dec 2017 14:09:40 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 376E51614BC; Fri, 15 Dec 2017 11:09:38 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.cs.ucla.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id cYlXhXXK3eLS; Fri, 15 Dec 2017 11:09:37 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8576B1614E7; Fri, 15 Dec 2017 11:09:37 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at zimbra.cs.ucla.edu Original-Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.cs.ucla.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id K4D3oI0VeHnZ; Fri, 15 Dec 2017 11:09:37 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from Penguin.CS.UCLA.EDU (Penguin.CS.UCLA.EDU [131.179.64.200]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 669D6161436; Fri, 15 Dec 2017 11:09:37 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <5A34119D.6000407@gmx.at> Content-Language: en-US X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 131.179.128.68 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:221110 Archived-At: On 12/15/2017 10:17 AM, martin rudalics wrote: > How did you recognize the "callers that have the > assumption"?=C2=A0 What about the call in check_glyph_memory? I recognized callers that either --enable-gcc-warnings complained about=20 (because code after the FOR_EACH_FRAME loop clearly had undefined=20 behavior unless the loop iterated at least once), and callers where=20 historically there was an eassert that checked the assumption.=20 check_glyph_memory doesn't fall into either category; and now that I=20 look at its implementation it's clear that check_glyph_memory is not=20 making the assumption.