From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Andy Wingo Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: R6RS exception printing -- take #2 Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2011 16:08:17 +0100 Message-ID: References: <87y660txmd.fsf@rotty.yi.org> <87mxm9xcf5.fsf@gmx.at> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1297436629 27753 80.91.229.12 (11 Feb 2011 15:03:49 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2011 15:03:49 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Guile Development To: Andreas Rottmann Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Feb 11 16:03:43 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@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 1PnuX8-0006ZR-LV for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 11 Feb 2011 16:03:42 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:45415 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PnuX7-0005fS-J0 for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 11 Feb 2011 10:03:41 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=48208 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PnuWp-0005Xd-Uz for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 11 Feb 2011 10:03:34 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PnuWo-00011b-4P for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 11 Feb 2011 10:03:23 -0500 Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com ([64.74.157.62]:36273 helo=sasl.smtp.pobox.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PnuWn-00011M-V2 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 11 Feb 2011 10:03:22 -0500 Original-Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AC793098; Fri, 11 Feb 2011 10:04:22 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=GXv75EuOogK9F0j9Xl0YD4jFADQ=; b=N8DEey nWpnC80sot8XY+z76mlgyHI28NkkhBZaLj7T2DiglSlokZR4AXVJ9pdRcNlFXnB5 /W4LpfMZoQk689AajBni2iQ4t4wAV6kdRdEN1ZyOpL+rZwahsnMUZ/dkFKeMSrA3 5hYjAGVDbbjwCTahTy3X/lT4gmxEocLojK6os= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=XUqX8Szxe9CFLKiGGWXCs457Xy2HC+Po k+8pahaUJb0bTKtjC45fQz9e0URTVW3lP8yrK/ikn4Zq0X4EUPj26NzDeOjMhtwS VQv3a3EJvy1PbqP7RJbIm6s6DSA4l2Gy/HX+kKhA0ujlSMYUGOyXOnvOTqWUkHIh J4TX9UFV+QY= Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76798308F; Fri, 11 Feb 2011 10:04:21 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from unquote.localdomain (unknown [90.164.198.39]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D0331308D; Fri, 11 Feb 2011 10:04:19 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <87mxm9xcf5.fsf@gmx.at> (Andreas Rottmann's message of "Sun, 06 Feb 2011 19:09:34 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 34BF0306-35F0-11E0-86DC-AF401E47CF6F-02397024!a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-Received-From: 64.74.157.62 X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:11554 Archived-At: Hi Andreas, On Sun 06 Feb 2011 19:09, Andreas Rottmann writes: > exception-printer := port key args thunk -> nothing I ended up adopting this. Thanks for the patch. I reworked your patch a bit -- for example, print-exception is now in boot-9, and used by C also. The C bits were actually more important to me than the R6RS exceptions, so I poked that first. > However, I think it would be more consistent to always print source > information if available > If we decide to do the source-information printing inside > `print-exception' (as proposed above), we might think about deprecating > `display-error' in favor of `print-exception'. Done. I don't like display-error, let's stop using it. I didn't actually deprecate display-error, but it's on the list... I guess we need to fix the docs now. > `display-error' cannot be implemented in terms of `print-exception', as > the former is missing the `key' argument that the latter requires. I just made it fabricate a "misc-error" key. It's not lying if no one knows, right? Cheers, Andy -- http://wingolog.org/