[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#7952: 24.0.50; crash in find_interval
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
bug#7952: 24.0.50; crash in find_interval |
Date: |
Mon, 09 May 2011 18:42:44 +0300 |
> From: Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>
> Cc: cyd@stupidchicken.com, romain@orebokech.com, 7952@debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Mon, 09 May 2011 12:32:29 -0300
>
> >> BTW, wouldn't it be preferable to pass the `start' position as an
> >> argument rather passing it implicitly via a dynamic variable?
>
> > ??? It's a hook we are going to call, right? It's not just any
> > function.
>
> run-hook-with-args (...-hook would need to be renamed to ...-functions,
> of course).
Which breaks back-compatibility. Unless we introduce
compilation-filter-start-functions _in_addition_to_ the existing
hook. But that sounds gross, just to avoid a single let-bound dynamic
variable, doesn't it?
- bug#7952: 24.0.50; crash in find_interval, Stefan Monnier, 2011/05/02
- bug#7952: 24.0.50; crash in find_interval, Chong Yidong, 2011/05/08
- bug#7952: 24.0.50; crash in find_interval, Eli Zaretskii, 2011/05/08
- bug#7952: 24.0.50; crash in find_interval, Chong Yidong, 2011/05/08
- bug#7952: 24.0.50; crash in find_interval, Eli Zaretskii, 2011/05/09
- bug#7952: 24.0.50; crash in find_interval, Stefan Monnier, 2011/05/09
- bug#7952: 24.0.50; crash in find_interval, Eli Zaretskii, 2011/05/09
- bug#7952: 24.0.50; crash in find_interval, Stefan Monnier, 2011/05/09
- bug#7952: 24.0.50; crash in find_interval,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- bug#7952: 24.0.50; crash in find_interval, Stefan Monnier, 2011/05/09
- bug#7952: 24.0.50; crash in find_interval, Chong Yidong, 2011/05/09
- bug#7952: 24.0.50; crash in find_interval, Eli Zaretskii, 2011/05/09