From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Helmut Eller Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#9463: 24.0.50; Errors should not be continuable Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2011 09:36:59 +0200 Message-ID: References: <83vct25gxy.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1315553887 10694 80.91.229.12 (9 Sep 2011 07:38:07 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2011 07:38:07 +0000 (UTC) To: 9463@debbugs.gnu.org Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Sep 09 09:38:03 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 1R1vf1-0004At-H9 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 09 Sep 2011 09:38:03 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38872 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R1vf1-0006GQ-1i for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 09 Sep 2011 03:38:03 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:36918) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R1vey-0006GL-HY for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 09 Sep 2011 03:38:01 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R1vex-0005oY-EV for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 09 Sep 2011 03:38:00 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:34827) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R1vex-0005oT-B1 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 09 Sep 2011 03:37:59 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R1vis-0000WF-18; Fri, 09 Sep 2011 03:42:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org In-Reply-To: Resent-From: Helmut Eller Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-To: owner@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2011 07:42:01 +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: X-Debbugs-Original-To: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-Received: via spool by submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B.13155540881954 (code B ref -1); Fri, 09 Sep 2011 07:42:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Sep 2011 07:41:28 +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 1R1viH-0000VQ-Lu for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 09 Sep 2011 03:41:28 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R1viC-0000VH-NX for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 09 Sep 2011 03:41:24 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R1veG-0005ka-UH for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 09 Sep 2011 03:37:17 -0400 Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]:33132) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R1veG-0005kW-QO for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 09 Sep 2011 03:37:16 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:36760) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R1veF-0006DG-SG for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 09 Sep 2011 03:37:16 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R1veE-0005kK-Rs for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 09 Sep 2011 03:37:15 -0400 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:42756) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R1veE-0005kE-MF for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 09 Sep 2011 03:37:14 -0400 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R1veD-0003of-HA for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 09 Sep 2011 09:37:13 +0200 Original-Received: from dial-176163.pool.broadband44.net ([212.46.176.163]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 09 Sep 2011 09:37:13 +0200 Original-Received: from eller.helmut by dial-176163.pool.broadband44.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 09 Sep 2011 09:37:13 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 32 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: dial-176163.pool.broadband44.net User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:mumyTBj34yosZFFeHD630xoyevg= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2011 03:42:02 -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:50745 Archived-At: * Eli Zaretskii [2011-09-09 07:10] writes: >> From: Stefan Monnier >> Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2011 22:23:09 -0400 >> Cc: 9463@debbugs.gnu.org >> >> > I think the "do what would have happened if the debugger had not been >> > called" thing should be a different command, like resignal or abort. >> >> Why? When the debugger is called in a non-error case, the "c" does just >> that "do whatever would have happened if the debug call had no taken place". >> >> > c should only continue from truly continuable situations, like >> > breakpoints. >> >> Again: why? > > I agree with Stefan. The current operation of `c' is consistent with > what other debuggers do in this situation. For example, when GDB > catches a fatal signal, typing `c' will simply let the program > continue with the signal, which may mean it will crash. What's the point of being compatible with GDB but not with previous versions of the Elisp debugger or for that matter with other Lisp debuggers? For instance in Common Lisp (continue) invokes the current continue restart, but of course only if there is such a restart. If there is no continue restart (continue) doesn't unwind the stack and simply returns nil. (You'd have to know what a restart is to understand that paragraph, but the "what other languages/debuggers do" is a weak argument anyway.) Helmut