GNU bug report logs - #29039
`iter-do' doesn't instrument its body

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 29039 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 29039 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: Paul Pogonyshev <pogonyshev <at> gmail.com>
To: bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
Subject: `iter-do' doesn't instrument its body
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2017 13:07:00 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Attached trivial patch simply adds `(declare (debug ...))' to the
macro. I believe it is perfectly safe and trivial, no mention in NEWS
etc. is needed. I would ask to merge it to branch 26 if possible.

Note that it doesn't quite let you debug generators anyway because of
bug #28725, but the change makes sense regardless. In particular, with
`iter2' package you should be able to debug generator functions called
from `iter-do'.

Paul

[0001-Add-missing-debug-declaration-to-iter-do.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

Message #8 received at 29039 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Paul Pogonyshev <pogonyshev <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 29039 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#29039: `iter-do' doesn't instrument its body
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2017 14:32:21 +0300

> From: Paul Pogonyshev <pogonyshev <at> gmail.com>
> Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2017 13:07:00 +0200
> 
> Attached trivial patch simply adds `(declare (debug ...))' to the
> macro. I believe it is perfectly safe and trivial, no mention in NEWS
> etc. is needed. I would ask to merge it to branch 26 if possible.

Why do you want it on the emacs-26 branch?

Thanks.

Message #11 received at 29039 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Paul Pogonyshev <pogonyshev <at> gmail.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 29039 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#29039: `iter-do' doesn't instrument its body
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2017 14:48:14 +0200

Because it allows debugging generator functions with `iter2' package.
`iter2' replaces only `iter-defun' and `iter-lambda', but uses all the
rest of infrastructure (`iter-yield', `iter-next', `iter-do' and so
on).

I'm 100% sure this change cannot break anything in `generator' and is
logical in itself.

Paul

On 28 October 2017 at 13:32, Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> wrote:
>> From: Paul Pogonyshev <pogonyshev <at> gmail.com>
>> Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2017 13:07:00 +0200
>>
>> Attached trivial patch simply adds `(declare (debug ...))' to the
>> macro. I believe it is perfectly safe and trivial, no mention in NEWS
>> etc. is needed. I would ask to merge it to branch 26 if possible.
>
> Why do you want it on the emacs-26 branch?
>
> Thanks.

Message #16 received at 29039-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Paul Pogonyshev <pogonyshev <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 29039-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#29039: `iter-do' doesn't instrument its body
Date: Fri, 03 Nov 2017 15:51:51 +0200

> From: Paul Pogonyshev <pogonyshev <at> gmail.com>
> Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2017 14:48:14 +0200
> Cc: 29039 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> 
> Because it allows debugging generator functions with `iter2' package.
> `iter2' replaces only `iter-defun' and `iter-lambda', but uses all the
> rest of infrastructure (`iter-yield', `iter-next', `iter-do' and so
> on).
> 
> I'm 100% sure this change cannot break anything in `generator' and is
> logical in itself.

Thanks, pushed.

Previous Next

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