GNU bug report logs - #37415
Asserting failure setting frame parameters to non-fixnum values in early-init.el

Previous Next

Full log

Message #62 received at 37415 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Juanma Barranquero <lekktu <at> gmail.com>
Cc: rudalics <at> gmx.at, 37415 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#37415: Asserting failure setting frame parameters to
 non-fixnum values in early-init.el
Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 19:26:26 +0300

> From: Juanma Barranquero <lekktu <at> gmail.com>
> Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 07:54:07 +0200
> Cc: martin rudalics <rudalics <at> gmx.at>, 37415 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> 
> With no init.el or early-init.el:
> 
>    emacs --eval "(let ((default-frame-alist '((left . 1000)))) (make-frame-command))"
> 
> works (it creates an additional frame, displaced to the right).
> 
>    emacs --eval "(let ((default-frame-alist '((left . (- 0))))) (make-frame-command))"
>  
> lisp.h:1231: Emacs fatal error: assertion failed: FIXNUMP (a)
> 
> Or, equivalently,
> 
>   emacs -Q --no-site-file
> 
>   M-: (let ((default-frame-alist '((left . (- 0))))) (make-frame-command)) <RET>
> 
> so the bit about early-init.el seems like a red herring.

Indeed.  As always, it's my fault: the change you mentioned up-thread
modified the order of code execution: where previously, if
f->size_hint_flags were set, we didn't look at the left and top frame
parameters, now we examine the frame parameters _before_ looking at
size_hint_flags, and thus can try to interpret values of top and left
we never did before.

So I think Martin's patch is going in the right direction, but we
could do it even cleaner, see my other mail.

Previous Next

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