Re: The poor quality of Emacs's backtraces

[Mattias Engdegård]

14 juli 2023 kl. 15.07 skrev Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de>:

> There are only 1,728 occurrences of CHECK_* in the Emacs C sources.
> Much of the amendment could be automated.

No, we had better be careful here -- don't want to make anything slower.

> Yesterday evening, the identity of {comp-spill-lap-function} was
> very helpful in locating the buggy source.

That was yesterday. Today you wouldn't need it, because nth now appears in the 
backtrace (well, most of the time).

> Do you have any alternative mechanism in mind for identifying anonymous
> functions in backtraces?

I disagree with the idea of that somehow being a requirement.