From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#7825: Cannot return from the debugger Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 09:53:54 -0500 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1294845881 3753 80.91.229.12 (12 Jan 2011 15:24:41 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 15:24:41 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 7825@debbugs.gnu.org To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jan 12 16:24:34 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Pd2Yn-0002ry-79 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 16:24:29 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34191 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Pd2Ym-0006dN-82 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 10:24:28 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=57237 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Pd2Yd-0006bf-Dr for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 10:24:20 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Pd2Yb-0006c6-Ei for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 10:24:18 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:56802) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Pd2Yb-0006bu-Cq for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 10:24:17 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Pd1yX-0006TB-My; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 09:47:01 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Stefan Monnier Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-To: owner@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 14:47:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 7825 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 7825-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B7825.129484359824834 (code B ref 7825); Wed, 12 Jan 2011 14:47:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 7825) by debbugs.gnu.org; 12 Jan 2011 14:46:38 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Pd1yA-0006SV-D1 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 09:46:38 -0500 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.183] helo=ironport2-out.pppoe.ca) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Pd1y8-0006SK-2m for 7825@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 09:46:36 -0500 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: An8GAM5PLU1FxIbi/2dsb2JhbACWLY4QdLwthUwEhGiOKA X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.60,313,1291611600"; d="scan'208";a="87734738" Original-Received: from 69-196-134-226.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO ceviche.home) ([69.196.134.226]) by ironport2-out.pppoe.ca with ESMTP/TLS/ADH-AES256-SHA; 12 Jan 2011 09:53:54 -0500 Original-Received: by ceviche.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 2EBC5660BB; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 09:53:54 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: (Richard Stallman's message of "Wed, 12 Jan 2011 00:17:41 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 09:47:01 -0500 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:43295 Archived-At: > The limitation that we "Cannot return from the debugger in an > error", is a bug: we should be able to continue (i.e. run the code > of the corresponding error handler), just as if the debugger had > not been invoked. > That is fine in theory, but it would imply that any place that can get > an error can also GC. I'm not sure I understand: "continuing from an error" would simply throw to the error handler up the stack, which is not fundamentally different from what we currently do (except we currently throw up to the "top-level" rather than some intermediate error handler). Stefan