[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#8789: 23.3; debug backtrace buffer changes window on step-through
From: |
Drew Adams |
Subject: |
bug#8789: 23.3; debug backtrace buffer changes window on step-through |
Date: |
Thu, 20 Sep 2012 14:33:00 -0700 |
> > 3. But I also think that it should be enough, for this problematic
> > mode line enhancement, to simply call a duplicate of `file-remote-p'
> > and not `file-remote-p' itself, which is used by all kinds of code.
> >
> > If that duplicate (e.g., `mode-line-file-remote-p') is
> > called only by the mode-line code then that should greatly reduce,
> > if not eliminate, this problem for the debugger.
>
> But do you really think that this is the right approach? E.g. in
> dired+, we use (:eval ...) in the dired mode-string. It's not very
> useful to create a duplicate of all lisp functions we call in
> this form only because of the fact that they are used for the mode-line.
Again, if you have an elegant, general solution, I'm all ears.
We are confronted with a particular regression, caused by the new occurrence of
calling `file-remote-p' when updating the mode line. Why not fix that?
> And, in the case of `file-remote-p', it wouldn't even be enough to
> duplicate just this function. We would have to duplicate any
> function that could be called by `file-remote-p' as well.
No, sorry, I don't see that. The problem is only calls to `file-remote-p', not
also calls to `find-file-name-handler' (which is called by `file-remote-p') or
calls to `if' or `funcall' (also called by `file-remote-p').
AFAICT, it does not matter that `mode-line-file-remote-p' would call
`find-file-name-handler' or `if' or `funcall'. `M-x debug-on-entry
file-remote-p', or adding `debug' to your (non mode-line) code that calls
`file-remote-p', would not cause the debugger to open when
`mode-line-file-remote-p' is called or when any of the functions it calls is
called.
But perhaps I'm missing something?
- bug#8789: 23.3; debug backtrace buffer changes window on step-through, (continued)
- bug#8789: 23.3; debug backtrace buffer changes window on step-through, Eli Zaretskii, 2012/09/20
- bug#8789: 23.3; debug backtrace buffer changes window on step-through, Drew Adams, 2012/09/20
- bug#8789: 23.3; debug backtrace buffer changes window on step-through, Eli Zaretskii, 2012/09/20
- bug#8789: 23.3; debug backtrace buffer changes window on step-through, Drew Adams, 2012/09/20
- bug#8789: 23.3; debug backtrace buffer changes window on step-through, Stefan Monnier, 2012/09/20
- bug#8789: 23.3; debug backtrace buffer changes window on step-through, Michael Heerdegen, 2012/09/20
- bug#8789: 23.3; debug backtrace buffer changes window on step-through, Drew Adams, 2012/09/20
- bug#8789: 23.3; debug backtrace buffer changes window on step-through, Eli Zaretskii, 2012/09/20
- bug#8789: 23.3; debug backtrace buffer changes window on step-through, Drew Adams, 2012/09/20
- bug#8789: 23.3; debug backtrace buffer changes window on step-through, Michael Heerdegen, 2012/09/20
- bug#8789: 23.3; debug backtrace buffer changes window on step-through,
Drew Adams <=
- bug#8789: 23.3; debug backtrace buffer changes window on step-through, Michael Heerdegen, 2012/09/20
- bug#8789: 23.3; debug backtrace buffer changes window on step-through, Drew Adams, 2012/09/20
- bug#8789: 23.3; debug backtrace buffer changes window on step-through, Drew Adams, 2012/09/19