From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Lisp watchpoints Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2015 10:37:53 -0500 Message-ID: References: <83wpt922dn.fsf@gnu.org> <87bnadjb7o.fsf@igel.home> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1448811506 10814 80.91.229.3 (29 Nov 2015 15:38:26 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2015 15:38:26 +0000 (UTC) Cc: John Wiegley , Eli Zaretskii , Andreas Schwab , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Noam Postavsky Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Nov 29 16:38:14 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1a343J-0006va-Hr for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 29 Nov 2015 16:38:13 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:36679 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a343N-0006R4-Fg for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 29 Nov 2015 10:38:17 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45770) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a3435-0006QX-Si for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 29 Nov 2015 10:38:00 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a3435-0006cg-6s for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 29 Nov 2015 10:37:59 -0500 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.181]:41107) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a3431-0006bs-6f; Sun, 29 Nov 2015 10:37:55 -0500 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0CtCwA731xV/yr292hcgxCEAsEMCYdLBAICgTw5FAEBAQEBAQGBCkEFg10BAQMBViMFCwsOJhIUGA0kiDcIzyMBAQEHAQEBAR6LOoUFB4QtBYwwqFQjgWaCMCCCeAEBAQ X-IPAS-Result: A0CtCwA731xV/yr292hcgxCEAsEMCYdLBAICgTw5FAEBAQEBAQGBCkEFg10BAQMBViMFCwsOJhIUGA0kiDcIzyMBAQEHAQEBAR6LOoUFB4QtBYwwqFQjgWaCMCCCeAEBAQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.13,465,1427774400"; d="scan'208";a="179696986" Original-Received: from 104-247-246-42.cpe.teksavvy.com (HELO fmsmemgm.homelinux.net) ([104.247.246.42]) by ironport2-out.teksavvy.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 29 Nov 2015 10:37:53 -0500 Original-Received: by fmsmemgm.homelinux.net (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 768ECAE07A; Sun, 29 Nov 2015 10:37:53 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: (Noam Postavsky's message of "Sun, 29 Nov 2015 09:12:34 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 206.248.154.181 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:195536 Archived-At: > It would signal in case of error right? Currently the code is ignoring > bad watcher elements (including out of range integers), but perhaps > it's actually better to signal an error. It's marginally better to signal an error, I think. But the difference is not tremendously important. Stefan