Re: Reporting Lisp errors in dynamic modules

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2015 12:20:03 +0100
> From: Aurélien Aptel <address@hidden>
> Cc: Emacs development discussions <address@hidden>, Ted Zlatanov 
> <address@hidden>, 
>       Daniel Colascione <address@hidden>, Philipp Stephani <address@hidden>
> 
> On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 12:07 PM, Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> wrote:
> > I believe the line with "<subr module-call>" is suboptimal, in that it
> > looks alien and includes all kinds of unneeded and weirdly formatted
> > data.  AFAIU, the reason is that we deliberately unintern module-call.
> > Should we perhaps reconsider that decision, so that the backtrace is
> > in more familiar form?  What exactly are the dangers of having
> > module-call exposed as any other primitive?
> 
> It's an implementation detail and cannot be used safely by Lisp users.
> The danger of using it is it can make core Emacs crash.

How can it cause Emacs to crash?  Can you show a specific scenario?
We should be able to prevent that.

> We also don't want the risk of someone overriding it.

How is that different from any other primitive?

> Also, unrelated but can I be added to the savannah emacs group? My
> savannah account is aaptel.

Please apply, and please explain your interests.