From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Lennart Borgman" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: tramp+recentf: persistent errors due to expand-file-name Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 15:04:01 +0200 Message-ID: References: <9E807BB3-1944-44F8-A5F5-1DBED9C99927@gmail.com> <87hc9rqs1k.fsf@gmx.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_6220_23994395.1218546241255" X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1218546357 30650 80.91.229.12 (12 Aug 2008 13:05:57 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 13:05:57 +0000 (UTC) Cc: David Reitter , Emacs-Devel devel To: "Michael Albinus" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Aug 12 15:06:48 2008 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 1KStYl-0007l8-UU for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 12 Aug 2008 15:05:45 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34030 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KStXp-0001Dw-HX for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 12 Aug 2008 09:04:13 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KStXg-00019f-UC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Aug 2008 09:04:05 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KStXf-00016P-8N for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Aug 2008 09:04:04 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=44942 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KStXe-000161-Tk for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Aug 2008 09:04:02 -0400 Original-Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.158]:53296) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KStXe-0006uy-LM for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Aug 2008 09:04:03 -0400 Original-Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id l26so1360979fgb.30 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2008 06:04:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; bh=8OM2FfwAHeFWnzng/r00W6EZ7GYoTvowI6CTMHCmzZU=; b=uZuToLm4itXK0apkc8IWN6RXMFr116OP3zyT7+Ne8SHiGBP2MWDQy7CS4cXDxfGc91 dypyJrzbbTtGKTJybTkiCcXDLAbBxijlbbYXwk+I6r/sf2VDubr1zTnJM4CW0R97IUPT OJyQiK24SGe51NeOjvbP3gyChNh3H8QsX7Hj8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:references; b=NIOlT/GR3Tn3Ud3JgQOi/j3tTXZcNECfG8dJv4lcQPqmvSKkxr0rXHo4VYBQhZYouq 8fWT5mqgrjv0B9Tq92o2j9dsikgJlYw8zGfp3mwTGu6dxX1bMN/Fjo+BUgEwLsmUlSIf k8+CZAgNK4afno9HPHfLQ4xwlbDbzkpAec9f0= Original-Received: by 10.86.63.19 with SMTP id l19mr10209605fga.60.1218546241261; Tue, 12 Aug 2008 06:04:01 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.86.66.2 with HTTP; Tue, 12 Aug 2008 06:04:01 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) 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:102324 Archived-At: ------=_Part_6220_23994395.1218546241255 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 2:57 PM, Michael Albinus wrote: > David Reitter writes: > > > Generally, I do think it is prudent to guard against errors being > > signaled when running code from hooks so that users don't end up in a > > (to them) non-recoverable situation. You'll know best where the right > > place is... > > Generally: yes. > > But Tramp does not know that it runs from a hook, so it might be > better to protect the code which evaluates the hook. > > > - D > > Best regards, Michael. > > I agree, but there is a problem with this in Emas. If you protect the code with condition-case it makes it very hard to find out where the problem was. It would be good if someone find a way to enhance this. ------=_Part_6220_23994395.1218546241255 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 2:57 PM, Michael Albinus <michael.albinus@gmx.de> wrote:
David Reitter <david.reitter@gmail.com> writes:

> Generally, I do think it is prudent to guard against errors being
> signaled when running code from hooks so that users don't end up in a
> (to them) non-recoverable situation.  You'll know best where the right
> place is...

Generally: yes.

But Tramp does not know that it runs from a hook, so it might be
better to protect the code which evaluates the hook.

> - D

Best regards, Michael.


I agree, but there is a problem with this in Emas. If you protect the code with condition-case it makes it very hard to find out where the problem was. It would be good if someone find a way to enhance this.
------=_Part_6220_23994395.1218546241255--