GNU bug report logs - #20066
24.4; should-error and cl-assert

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 20066 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 20066 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Leo Liu <sdl.web <at> gmail.com>
To: bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
Subject: 24.4; should-error and cl-assert
Date: Mon, 09 Mar 2015 16:06:44 +0800

I just compiled emacs 25.0.50 from git and I have immediately noticed
the following difference:

1. (should-error (error "yes"))
2. (should-error (cl-assert nil t))

Test 1 succeeds but test 2 fails. In emacs 24.4, both tests succeed.
Could someone investigate what have caused this incompatibility?

Thanks,
Leo

Message #8 received at 20066 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Wolfgang Jenkner <wjenkner <at> inode.at>
To: Leo Liu <sdl.web <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 20066 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#20066: 24.4; should-error and cl-assert
Date: Mon, 09 Mar 2015 17:12:35 +0100

On Mon, Mar 09 2015, Leo Liu wrote:

> I just compiled emacs 25.0.50 from git and I have immediately noticed
> the following difference:
>
> 1. (should-error (error "yes"))
> 2. (should-error (cl-assert nil t))
>
> Test 1 succeeds but test 2 fails. In emacs 24.4, both tests succeed.
> Could someone investigate what have caused this incompatibility?

commit 61b4c22c6eba96718327a0d208a8492d8bad76e0
Author: Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
Date:   Sat Feb 14 00:46:29 2015 -0500

[...]
    (cl--assertion-failed): New function.

+(defun cl--assertion-failed (form &optional string sargs args)
+  (if debug-on-error
+      (debug `(cl-assertion-failed ,form ,string ,@sargs))


So, `debug' is explicitly called now, which circumvents the normal
call-chain: signal > maybe_call_debugger > call_debugger > debug

Message #13 received at 20066 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Leo Liu <sdl.web <at> gmail.com>
To: 20066 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#20066: 24.4; should-error and cl-assert
Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2015 15:44:45 +0800

On 2015-03-09 16:06 +0800, Leo Liu wrote:
> I just compiled emacs 25.0.50 from git and I have immediately noticed
> the following difference:
>
> 1. (should-error (error "yes"))
> 2. (should-error (cl-assert nil t))
>
> Test 1 succeeds but test 2 fails. In emacs 24.4, both tests succeed.
> Could someone investigate what have caused this incompatibility?
>
> Thanks,
> Leo

Any comments on this bug?

Message #16 received at 20066 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Nicolas Richard <theonewiththeevillook <at> yahoo.fr>
To: Leo Liu <sdl.web <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 20066 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#20066: 24.4; should-error and cl-assert
Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2015 14:47:00 +0200

Leo Liu <sdl.web <at> gmail.com> writes:
> Any comments on this bug?

Hi,

I can't seem to reproduce :

 $ src/emacs --version
GNU Emacs 25.0.50.1
Copyright (C) 2015 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
GNU Emacs comes with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY.
You may redistribute copies of GNU Emacs
under the terms of the GNU General Public License.
For more information about these matters, see the file named COPYING.
 $ src/emacs --batch -l ert --eval '(should-error (cl-assert nil t))'; echo $?
0
 $ src/emacs --batch -l ert --eval '(should-error (error "yes"))'; echo $?
0
 $ src/emacs --batch -l ert --eval '(should-error nil)'; echo $?
Test failed: ((should-error nil) :form nil :value nil :fail-reason "did not signal an error")
255

-- 
Nicolas Richard

Message #19 received at 20066 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Nicolas Richard <theonewiththeevillook <at> yahoo.fr>
To: Nicolas Richard <theonewiththeevillook <at> yahoo.fr>
Cc: 20066 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Leo Liu <sdl.web <at> gmail.com>
Subject: Re: bug#20066: 24.4; should-error and cl-assert
Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2015 15:10:38 +0200

Nicolas Richard <theonewiththeevillook <at> yahoo.fr> writes:
>  $ src/emacs --version
> GNU Emacs 25.0.50.1

Forgot to mention I was at commit
7c691f32f78303750d29972a29dcc6754fae257a from a few days ago.

Nico.

Message #22 received at 20066 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
To: Leo Liu <sdl.web <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 20066 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#20066: 24.4; should-error and cl-assert
Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2015 22:05:11 -0400

>> 1. (should-error (error "yes"))
>> 2. (should-error (cl-assert nil t))
>> Test 1 succeeds but test 2 fails.

I think test 2 is incorrect.  It assumes that when cl-assert fails it
reacts by throwing a "normal" signal that can be caught like any other.
This is untrue for example when we decide to compile-away the assertions
(depending on speed ans safety settings).

cl-assert should be used to check impossible situations and an assertion
failure is just supposed to bring it to the user's attention to help
debug the code.  It is not meant to be caught&handled like a normal
signal.


        Stefan

Message #27 received at 20066-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Leo Liu <sdl.web <at> gmail.com>
To: Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
Cc: 20066-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#20066: 24.4; should-error and cl-assert
Date: Wed, 08 Apr 2015 12:15:38 +0800

On 2015-04-08 10:05 +0800, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> I think test 2 is incorrect.  It assumes that when cl-assert fails it
> reacts by throwing a "normal" signal that can be caught like any other.
> This is untrue for example when we decide to compile-away the assertions
> (depending on speed ans safety settings).
>
> cl-assert should be used to check impossible situations and an assertion
> failure is just supposed to bring it to the user's attention to help
> debug the code.  It is not meant to be caught&handled like a normal
> signal.

OK, that makes sense.

Leo

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.