From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Ok, here is the bug I have been looking for. Kim, not Jan... Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 00:40:04 +0100 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1109806852 5434 80.91.229.2 (2 Mar 2005 23:40:52 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 23:40:52 +0000 (UTC) Cc: snogglethorpe@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, miles@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Mar 03 00:40:50 2005 Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1D6dQj-0003NX-5K for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 03 Mar 2005 00:39:01 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1D6djZ-000193-6N for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 02 Mar 2005 18:58:29 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1D6dhw-0000Zv-Pt for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Mar 2005 18:56:49 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1D6dhv-0000ZF-2i for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Mar 2005 18:56:47 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1D6dhu-0000Yp-Ln for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Mar 2005 18:56:46 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1D6dRm-00021k-U3 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Mar 2005 18:40:06 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lola.goethe.zz) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1D6dRl-0004Db-JS; Wed, 02 Mar 2005 18:40:06 -0500 Original-To: storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) In-Reply-To: (Kim F. Storm's message of "Thu, 03 Mar 2005 00:10:35 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) 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 X-MailScanner-To: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:34108 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:34108 storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) writes: > Miles Bader writes: > >> I think an explicit decision should be made one way or the other. > > Based on the fact that _I_ don't have the necessary time to debug more > silly xasserts, _I_ made the explicit decision to disable them. > >> >> At the time I enabled it, that was not clear the degree to which it >> would be a contentious issue (I had been using it personally for ages >> without any notable problems, and I _did_ ask before I enabled it by >> default) -- however, now it is. > > -- and now it isn't. I'd have prefered to solve conflicts other than by battling commits, even though it is more than obvious that this change at least suits me. At the moment, rather few developers have voiced an opinion in this matter. It will clearly be a good idea at the time Kim thinks that the changes in the display engine have reached a state where no major overhauls are due until the release, and where the remaining assertions are strictly consistent with the expected behavior, that a larger _developer_ base will run with xasserts switch on. And I agree with Miles that it would be beneficial if assertions for which this is not clear in the current situation get outcommented or moved to a different class of assertions for now, so that one has the possibility of running with assertions switched on while getting useful information. Assertions should stay in a usable state, that much I agree with Miles. I don't agree with his opinion that it is a good idea to enable them in HEAD now. After we branch for release, I would not object. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum