From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Mon Apr 29 19:42:54 2013 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 29 Apr 2013 23:42:54 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:51123 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UWxig-000511-1i for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 19:42:54 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:42325) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UWxie-00050o-FJ for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 19:42:53 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UWxiJ-0002LR-Lu for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 19:42:32 -0400 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_05,FREEMAIL_FROM, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_XBL,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,USER_IN_WHITELIST autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]:44678) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UWxiJ-0002LN-Im for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 19:42:31 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:53687) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UWxiI-0006Nv-NN for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 19:42:31 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UWxiH-0002LB-PI for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 19:42:30 -0400 Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.15.3]:52597) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UWxiH-0002L4-Fy for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 19:42:29 -0400 Received: from drachen.dragon ([89.204.138.205]) by smtp.web.de (mrweb101) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0Lm4Z3-1V61Pm3CML-00aFji for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 01:42:28 +0200 From: Michael Heerdegen To: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Subject: 24.3.50; nadvice.el: named advices not upgradable Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2013 01:42:14 +0200 Message-ID: <87mwsgx5t5.fsf@web.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:34xD7MeIn7KUWHvuPr/yRPge8XiyPhB2VHBApaOB8MM +4fWm7TxkpAsGqwqmFPzAir7pw8PNRVAQUKuzRAmyE5FWu7tAW Fne1+JPYQb7+LtOAw1HH0J7mrDPMIEhCSBUeU846ww7KdsbUXM n7suaG6XAaSvVuQnD8hurweoqGSX6khsRtGT4LYXsos6tSvuhE 4AQCpyk9Gw7Rm4/4eA0vEm/pbZSBoS1S4+KbT7Wv0g= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.4.x-2.6.x [generic] X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 208.118.235.17 X-Spam-Score: -4.2 (----) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list Reply-To: michael_heerdegen@web.de List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -6.9 (------) Hi Stefan, if you have some code adding advices that can be identified (i.e., adding named advices or fbound symbols, not anonymous functions), and you change this code defining the advice and re-evaluate, the change doesn't take effect (in contrast to the behavior of advice.el). We currently use this: --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- (defun advice--add-function (where ref function props) (unless (advice--member-p function (cdr (assq 'name props)) (gv-deref ref)) (setf (gv-deref ref) (advice--make where function (gv-deref ref) props)))) --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- but as a user, I would suspect something like --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- (defun advice--add-function (where ref function props) (when (advice--member-p function (cdr (assq 'name props)) (gv-deref ref)) (advice--remove-function .........)) (setf (gv-deref ref) (advice--make where function (gv-deref ref) props))) --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- i.e., replacing the old code, instead of doing nothing. Is the current behavior intended? If not, can we change it? Regards, Michael. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu May 02 21:21:37 2013 Received: (at 14317) by debbugs.gnu.org; 3 May 2013 01:21:37 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55979 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UY4gm-00081V-J8 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 02 May 2013 21:21:37 -0400 Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.15.4]:54509) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UY4gg-000812-6W for 14317@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 02 May 2013 21:21:31 -0400 Received: from drachen.dragon ([89.204.130.13]) by smtp.web.de (mrweb003) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MOAmi-1UdYrK40c0-006EmL; Fri, 03 May 2013 03:20:47 +0200 From: Michael Heerdegen To: 14317@debbugs.gnu.org Subject: Re: bug#14317: 24.3.50; nadvice.el: named advices not upgradable References: <87mwsgx5t5.fsf@web.de> Date: Fri, 03 May 2013 03:20:42 +0200 In-Reply-To: <87mwsgx5t5.fsf@web.de> (Michael Heerdegen's message of "Tue, 30 Apr 2013 01:42:14 +0200") Message-ID: <87li7w7tat.fsf@web.de> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:H/Eww58zZK02Q+WN9s6GKyQ2Y/HYXMZquVOAWNWhioe m5cLt1bfDUlS0ogB+FZFYyk08U/4OBs63JOucxqXlL6RKmC7rm gab/wJYUwKYI39KolvEjyghpmEiKtaygIROEj/z1x6ULeRnNSF xhKvJkSqV8jTxcP7AplS9tWNR1wQ2NuzRTHjKBWT83j/l17vcy 8dqmCVJABxrDYUWicIB14kUCu6kDETuvE3ZA8mA3NQ= X-Spam-Score: -2.5 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 14317 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -4.4 (----) Michael Heerdegen writes: > but as a user, I would suspect something like > > (defun advice--add-function (where ref function props) > (when (advice--member-p function (cdr (assq 'name props)) > (gv-deref ref)) > (advice--remove-function .........)) > (setf (gv-deref ref) > (advice--make where function (gv-deref ref) props))) > > i.e., replacing the old code, instead of doing nothing. We should probably distinguish between named functions and named advice. I mean, it's probably stupid to remove and add back an fboundp symbol - but you get the idea... Regards, Michael. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun May 05 01:50:24 2013 Received: (at 14317) by debbugs.gnu.org; 5 May 2013 05:50:24 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58400 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UYrq3-0006HT-NW for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 05 May 2013 01:50:24 -0400 Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.182]:20981) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UYrq2-0006HC-6T for 14317@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 05 May 2013 01:50:22 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhIKABK/CFFMCqRF/2dsb2JhbABEuzWCVwQDexdzgh4BAQQBViMFCws0EhQYDSSIHgbBLZEKA6R6gV6DEw X-IPAS-Result: AhIKABK/CFFMCqRF/2dsb2JhbABEuzWCVwQDexdzgh4BAQQBViMFCws0EhQYDSSIHgbBLZEKA6R6gV6DEw X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,565,1355115600"; d="scan'208";a="11065035" Received: from 76-10-164-69.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO pastel.home) ([76.10.164.69]) by ironport2-out.teksavvy.com with ESMTP/TLS/ADH-AES256-SHA; 05 May 2013 01:49:27 -0400 Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id A261867917; Sun, 5 May 2013 01:49:31 -0400 (EDT) From: Stefan Monnier To: Michael Heerdegen Subject: Re: bug#14317: 24.3.50; nadvice.el: named advices not upgradable Message-ID: References: <87mwsgx5t5.fsf@web.de> Date: Sun, 05 May 2013 01:49:31 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87mwsgx5t5.fsf@web.de> (Michael Heerdegen's message of "Tue, 30 Apr 2013 01:42:14 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 14317 Cc: 14317@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) > if you have some code adding advices that can be identified (i.e., > adding named advices or fbound symbols, not anonymous functions), > and you change this code defining the advice and re-evaluate, the change > doesn't take effect (in contrast to the behavior of advice.el). I think what you ask makes sense, yes. Stefan "no time to do it now, tho" From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Mon May 06 11:28:37 2013 Received: (at 14317-done) by debbugs.gnu.org; 6 May 2013 15:28:37 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59979 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UZNLB-0002LB-C5 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 06 May 2013 11:28:37 -0400 Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.182]:31538) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UZNL9-0002L0-U7 for 14317-done@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 06 May 2013 11:28:36 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av8EABK/CFFMCqRF/2dsb2JhbABEuzWDWRdzgh4BAQQBViMFCws0EhQYDSSIHgbBLZEKA6R6gV6DEw X-IPAS-Result: Av8EABK/CFFMCqRF/2dsb2JhbABEuzWDWRdzgh4BAQQBViMFCws0EhQYDSSIHgbBLZEKA6R6gV6DEw X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,565,1355115600"; d="scan'208";a="11321096" Received: from 76-10-164-69.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO pastel.home) ([76.10.164.69]) by ironport2-out.teksavvy.com with ESMTP/TLS/ADH-AES256-SHA; 06 May 2013 11:27:33 -0400 Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 3FB006C01A; Mon, 6 May 2013 11:27:37 -0400 (EDT) From: Stefan Monnier To: Michael Heerdegen Subject: Re: bug#14317: 24.3.50; nadvice.el: named advices not upgradable Message-ID: References: <87mwsgx5t5.fsf@web.de> Date: Mon, 06 May 2013 11:27:37 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87mwsgx5t5.fsf@web.de> (Michael Heerdegen's message of "Tue, 30 Apr 2013 01:42:14 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 14317-done Cc: 14317-done@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) > Is the current behavior intended? If not, can we change it? Changed, thanks, Stefan From unknown Fri Jun 20 07:13:57 2025 Received: (at fakecontrol) by fakecontrolmessage; To: internal_control@debbugs.gnu.org From: Debbugs Internal Request Subject: Internal Control Message-Id: bug archived. Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2013 11:24:03 +0000 User-Agent: Fakemail v42.6.9 # This is a fake control message. # # The action: # bug archived. thanks # This fakemail brought to you by your local debbugs # administrator