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#9463: 24.0.50; Errors should not be continuable Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 15:09:50 -0400 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1316632256 13464 80.91.229.12 (21 Sep 2011 19:10:56 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 19:10:56 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 9463@debbugs.gnu.org To: Helmut Eller Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Sep 21 21:10:51 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R6SC3-00032b-7f for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 21:10:51 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56189 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R6SC2-0007Um-Kx for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 15:10:50 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:59289) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R6SBz-0007UJ-Dl for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 15:10:48 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R6SBx-0001hI-Vr for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 15:10:47 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:33450) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R6SBx-0001h9-Qx for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 15:10:45 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R6SCE-0001bE-1m for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 15:11:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Stefan Monnier Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 19:11:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 9463 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 9463-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B9463.13166322156010 (code B ref 9463); Wed, 21 Sep 2011 19:11:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 9463) by debbugs.gnu.org; 21 Sep 2011 19:10:15 +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 1R6SBT-0001Yt-9T for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 15:10:15 -0400 Original-Received: from chene.dit.umontreal.ca ([132.204.246.20]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R6SBQ-0001Yi-6K for 9463@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 15:10:13 -0400 Original-Received: from faina.iro.umontreal.ca (lechon.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.27.242]) by chene.dit.umontreal.ca (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id p8LJ9pSH023068; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 15:09:52 -0400 Original-Received: by faina.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix, from userid 20848) id BE836B41D0; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 15:09:50 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Helmut Eller's message of "Wed, 21 Sep 2011 10:05:19 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-NAI-Spam-Flag: NO X-NAI-Spam-Threshold: 5 X-NAI-Spam-Score: 0 X-NAI-Spam-Rules: 1 Rules triggered RV3987=0 X-NAI-Spam-Version: 2.2.0.9286 : core <3987> : streams <683844> : uri <965366> X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 15:11:02 -0400 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 1) X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 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: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:51584 Archived-At: >>>>> Incidentally, C-M-c does pretty much the same as what c does currently. >>>> It does something similar but not identical and hence re-introduces some >>>> of the problems that the change you don't like aimed to solve. >>> And what exactly is the difference between C-M-c and c? >> C-M-c does a (throw 'exit), so in the case where we've caught a signal, >> it prevents the condition-case catchers from doing their job. > As matter of fact, c calls exit-recursive-edit (= C-M-c). > So (throw 'exit) can't be the difference. Ah, yes, indeed, I forgot about that part. So yes, C-M-c behaves very similarly (other than details like keeping the window displayed if there's a upper-level frame marked for debug-on-exit). > c now destroys information (backtrace, temporary buffers) in more > situations than in previous releases. I hope that we agree on this. `c' always destroys information when it works. And since it now works in more cases, it indeed destroys information in more situations. I think it's a feature. > You claim that this is "important". You neither explain why it is > important nor why not destroying information was a problem previously. I already explained. You just disagree that this is important, and you instead think it's more important to use the "stop at error" as a heuristic to prevent you from stepping too far. My experience is different, so we disagree. Have you tried the defadvice I suggested? Stefan