bug#13154: 24.3.50; emacs_backtrace.txt (different one)

[martin rudalics]

>> FWIW, it's not clear to me that `w-o-t-t-b' inside `s-e' is "evil".  It 
might be
>> ineffectual in some contexts, in the sense that it might not do what some 
users
>> mistakenly might expect, but - for my own understanding - just why do you
>> consider it evil?
>
> Martin will probably tell,

It's evil because `with-output-to-temp-buffer' may pop up a new frame
while `save-window-excursion' gives you the false impression that it can
cope with that situation.

> but in any case I don't think this is
> related to the abort we are discussing.

It should be unrelated.

>> * I found an occurrence in my version of `describe-function', which is based 
on
>> the vanilla Emacs 22 version in this respect.  It has to work for 22+, and 22
>> does not have macro `with-help-window'.  (Yes, I could duplicate the code and
>> have a version for Emacs 23+...)  In my own help commands (`describe-file',
>> `describe-keymap'), I do not use `save-excursion.
>>
>> * I found one other occurrence of `with-output-to-temp-buffer' inside
>> `save-excursion', but that code is used only when running Emacs 22, and it 
is a
>> copy of the vanilla Emacs 22 code (for `describe-text-properties').  IOW, the
>> fault is with vanilla Emacs in this case, and this case cannot be manifested 
in
>> Emacs 24 anyway.

`save-window-excursion' and not `save-excursion', I presume.

> We are looking for Lisp code that would show calls to some primitives,
> wherein we could look for potential bugs on the C level.  Does the
> body of Lisp code inside save-excursion in the first occurrence call
> any primitives, or any functions at all?  If so, can you show that
> body?

I still don't know whether you are sure that Drew runs some code within
`window-configuration-change-hook'.

martin