GNU bug report logs - #6991
Please keep bytecode out of *Backtrace* buffers

Previous Next

Package: emacs;

Reported by: jidanni <at> jidanni.org

Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2010 01:34:01 UTC

Severity: wishlist

Tags: fixed, notabug

Merged with 15789

Found in version 24.3.50

Fixed in version 26.1

Done: npostavs <at> users.sourceforge.net

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: npostavs <at> users.sourceforge.net
To: Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
Cc: lekktu <at> gmail.com, johnw <at> gnu.org, 6991 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>, larsi <at> gnus.org, drew.adams <at> oracle.com
Subject: bug#6991: Please keep bytecode out of *Backtrace* buffers
Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2017 21:26:31 -0500

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca> writes:
> FWIW, I agree.  The only issue I can see here is that depending on how
> it's done, it could affect the size of the .elc files (by using two bytes
> per bytecode 0 rather than 1).  Nothing too terrible, but it's probably
> worth checking whether it does make such a difference and if so how serious
> it is.

On average it increases Emacs' .elc by ~200 bytes each, 276kB in total,
or 100.62%.


[elc-sizes.org.gz (application/octet-stream, attachment)]
[Message part 3 (text/plain, inline)]
But actually, while looking at this, I understood more about what the
print_escape_nonascii flag is used for (i.e., multibyte vs unibyte
stuff), and I no longer think it makes sense for it to affect printing
the NUL byte anyway.

I propose adding a new flag print_escape_control_characters instead (see
patch #3 in the series).  I also implemented hiding the byte code
functions with text properties in #4.  It's not quite satisfactory
though, because it doesn't cover byte code functions values that are
arguments, only byte code being called.  I think printing needs to be
made more flexible in order to cleanly catch all byte code values.
Patch #5 replaces NUL bytes with "\0" in X selections (I guess it covers
w32 as well? Haven't checked yet).


[backtrace-6991-screenshot.png (image/png, attachment)]
[v1-0001-Operate-on-frame-list-instead-of-printed-backtrac.patch (text/plain, attachment)]
[v1-0002-Improve-ert-backtrace-recording.patch (text/plain, attachment)]
[v1-0003-Escape-control-characters-in-backtraces-Bug-6991.patch (text/plain, attachment)]
[v1-0004-Hide-byte-code-in-backtraces-Bug-6991.patch (text/plain, attachment)]
[v1-0005-Escape-NUL-bytes-in-X-selections-Bug-6991.patch (text/plain, attachment)]
This bug report was last modified 7 years and 254 days ago.

Previous Next

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