[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: C-g crash redux
From: |
Nick Roberts |
Subject: |
Re: C-g crash redux |
Date: |
Mon, 7 Aug 2006 08:58:34 +1200 |
> Can someone tell me what the issue is, here?
>
> >> It looks good to my inexperienced eye, but Emacs seems to go for a long
> >> time before hitting Fsignal. I wonder if Fsignal resets other things
> >> that might not add up in the interim period but I don't know what the
> >> rules are for placing the QUIT macro or whether one could be placed
> >> closer to read_char.
>
> Why does it matter when, or whether, Emacs would ever call Fsignal?
I'm not sure that it does matter, I was surmising. The problem with the
SPECL_INDEX imbalance arose because Emacs got back to Fbyte_code and checked
for an imbalance before reaching a call to unbind_to from Fsignal (from QUIT in
Ffuncall). However Fsignal also appears to clean up a lot of other things.
Maybe some of these could cause a problem just as the binding imbalance did.
--
Nick http://www.inet.net.nz/~nickrob
- Re: C-g crash redux, (continued)
- Re: C-g crash redux, Chong Yidong, 2006/08/03
- Re: C-g crash redux, Nick Roberts, 2006/08/03
- Re: C-g crash redux, Kim F. Storm, 2006/08/04
- Re: C-g crash redux, Chong Yidong, 2006/08/04
- Re: C-g crash redux, Chong Yidong, 2006/08/04
- Re: C-g crash redux, Richard Stallman, 2006/08/04
- Re: C-g crash redux, Nick Roberts, 2006/08/04
- Re: C-g crash redux, Kim F. Storm, 2006/08/04
- Re: C-g crash redux, David Kastrup, 2006/08/06
- Re: C-g crash redux, Richard Stallman, 2006/08/06
- Re: C-g crash redux,
Nick Roberts <=
- Re: C-g crash redux, Nick Roberts, 2006/08/03
Re: C-g crash redux, Chong Yidong, 2006/08/03
Re: C-g crash redux, Richard Stallman, 2006/08/03
Re: C-g crash redux, Richard Stallman, 2006/08/03