GNU bug report logs - #3283
Bug in Emacs' batch mode

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 3283 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 3283 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

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

Message #5 received at submit <at> emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com (full text, mbox):

From: Kevin Rodgers <kevin.d.rodgers <at> gmail.com>
To: bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
Subject: Re: Bug in Emacs' batch mode
Date: Wed, 13 May 2009 23:06:26 -0600

Davin Pearson wrote:
> When I run a file in Emacs' batch mode like so:
> 
> emacs --batch --load foo.el
> 
> It prints out  the following information:
> 
> -*- mode: compilation; default-directory: "~/dlisp/" -*-
> Compilation started at Tue May 12 11:06:41
> 
> make foo
> emacs --batch --load foo.el
> Loading cl...
> Loading cl-macs...
> 
> Compilation finished at Tue May 12 11:06:43
> Compilation took 2 seconds
> 
> This is a bug because I have redefined the function message to do
> nothing.  Therefore it shouldn't print out "Loading cl..." and
> "Loading cl-macs".  What follows is the contents of the file foo.el:
> 
> (defun message (format-string &rest args) (interactive))
> 
> (load-library "cl")
> (load-library "cl-macs")
> (require 'cl-19 "cl")
> (require 'cl)
> 
> ;; batch code goes here

message is a built-in function in `C source code'.
(message format-string &rest args)

There are calls to Fmessage() in Emacs' C source code which do not go
through the `message' Lisp symbol.

-- 
Kevin Rodgers
Denver, Colorado, USA

Message #12 received at submit <at> emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com (full text, mbox):

From: Kevin Rodgers <kevin.d.rodgers <at> gmail.com>
To: bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#3283: Bug in Emacs' batch mode
Date: Thu, 21 May 2009 22:48:58 -0600

Davin Pearson wrote:
> On May 14, 5:06 pm, Kevin Rodgers <kevin.d.rodg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> There are calls to Fmessage() in Emacs' C source code which do not go
>> through the `message' Lisp symbol.
> 
> Isn't that a bug, since it seems reasonable to redefine message to a
> do-nothing function?

There are many calls to Ffoo() functions in Emacs' C source code which
do not go through the `foo' Lisp symbols.  Are they all bugs?

-- 
Kevin Rodgers
Denver, Colorado, USA

Previous Next

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