On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 6:57 PM, Ken Tilton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Recently some evil programming took forever to debug because I was > re-entering a rule without realizing it. After figuring out that that was > happening and fixing the cause of that, I looked to see why rule re-entrance > had not been detected, which I seemed to recall it always had been. > > Turns out the rule began with without-c-dependency as a trick to run only > once. That macro simply: > > `(let ((cells::*call-stack* nil)) > ,@body) > > And that worked because the dependent cell was always identifed as (car > cells::*call-stack*).
Wow, congrats for figuring that out. Sounds like one of these things that take forever ... > Well, I like early bug detection you may have noticed recently <g>, so I > decided the macro without-c-dependency should leave the *call-stack* intact > and instead bind a separate new *depender* special to nil, with *depender* > being the, well, depender honored by the Cells machinery. Sounds good. And you obviously found some "unclean" stuff I was doing. > You should not have been doing cells-y stuff in i-i, but you got away with > it because of the old without-c-dependency behavior, so... Actually, the drawing area widget still gets away with it. Maybe because it does not have kids ... I don't know. > ...congratulations, you are the first victim to fall into my new bug trap. > :) I'm proud :) Peter _______________________________________________ cells-gtk-devel site list cells-gtk-devel@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/mailman/listinfo/cells-gtk-devel
