Re: [Patch] hard-widen-limits [was Re: Syntax tables for multiple modes [was: bug#22983: syntax-ppss returns wrong result.]]

[Andreas Schwab]

Vitalie Spinu <address@hidden> writes:

>>> On Sun, Apr 24 2016 18:19, Andreas Schwab wrote:
>
>> Vitalie Spinu <address@hidden> writes:
>
>>>>> On Sun, Apr 24 2016 15:20, Andreas Schwab wrote:
>>>
>>>> Vitalie Spinu <address@hidden> writes:
>>>
>>>>> @@ -1692,7 +1692,7 @@ exec_byte_code (Lisp_Object bytestr, Lisp_Object 
>>>>> vector, Lisp_Object maxdepth,
>>>>>  
>>>>>   CASE (Bwiden):
>>>>>     BEFORE_POTENTIAL_GC ();
>>>>> -   PUSH (Fwiden ());
>>>>> +   TOP = Fwiden (TOP);
>>>
>>>> You are clobbering the stack here.  Instead of pushing a new value you
>>>> are overwriting an unrelated value on the stack.
>>>
>>> I don't think so. I pick an argument form the stack and put the return 
>>> value in
>>> it. This is what all one-arg functions do in bytecode.c.
>
>> But nobody is pushing that argument.
>
> I am not pushing anything.

Exactly.  This opcode takes no argument, and you cannot change that.

Andreas.

-- 
Andreas Schwab, address@hidden
GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756  01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."