From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: My Emacs unicode 2 crash again when I do some *Replace String (M-%)*, I give the debug informations under gdb in the attachments. Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2007 21:18:59 +0200 Message-ID: References: <20070306063056.GA21948@debian-testing-hy.localdomain> <86zm6q5upr.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> <17902.9556.720278.162036@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1173554379 18256 80.91.229.12 (10 Mar 2007 19:19:39 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2007 19:19:39 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Mar 10 20:19:36 2007 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 1HQ76N-00058w-JI for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 10 Mar 2007 20:19:35 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HQ76m-0003SW-21 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 10 Mar 2007 14:20:00 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HQ76a-0003S8-48 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Mar 2007 14:19:48 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HQ76X-0003Rw-PK for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Mar 2007 14:19:46 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HQ76X-0003Rt-J2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Mar 2007 14:19:45 -0500 Original-Received: from romy.inter.net.il ([213.8.233.24]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1HQ763-0001Vo-H2; Sat, 10 Mar 2007 14:19:15 -0500 Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 (IGLD-80-230-99-47.inter.net.il [80.230.99.47]) by romy.inter.net.il (MOS 3.7.3-GA) with ESMTP id HIW64168 (AUTH halo1); Sat, 10 Mar 2007 21:18:42 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: (message from Richard Stallman on Fri, 09 Mar 2007 16:26:25 -0500) X-detected-kernel: FreeBSD 4.7-5.2 (or MacOS X 10.2-10.4) (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:67690 Archived-At: > From: Richard Stallman > CC: miles.bader@necel.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2007 16:26:25 -0500 > > I don't think that debugging with any specific optimizations is any > harder than it ever was. What has perhaps changed is that GCC does > additional optimizations, some of which can confuse debugging in > additional ways. As long as these additional optimizations are part of -O2, I'll maintain that it's impractical to debug programs built with -O2. > The situation is not black and white. With some cooperation, I'm > positive we could have had an option that enables only those > optimizations which do not severely hamper debugging. > > That might be a useful feature. If someone wants to prepare an > argument for it, and send it in to gcc@gnu.org cc'ing me, I could > support it. (I suggest showing me a draft to review before you sent it.) I'll try to do that (although my heart is broken by the outcomes of my previous attempts to talk to them about this and other similar issues).