Juanma Barranquero wrote:
Perhaps you're right, but I'd like to see some examples of things that
are much easier to debug from --eval than directly.
I have no examples at hand, but the context where the functions are
running is slightly different when they are called from emacsclient. Is
not that enough?
It might not be the right thing to do in all cases.
No. But if it is normal operation for your emacsclient invocation to
fail sometimes, it'd be sensible to *not* use -n and read
emacsclient's stderr output and exit code; and if it is not normal,
the moment you detect a problem you can remove the -n and try again.
Sure, but see above.
This is not to say that I oppose the feature; I just don't feel it
compelling right now (but I can be easily convinced :)
I am glad to read that ;-)
BTW, does emacsclient exit with an error when there is an error
evaluating the code that is sent from emacsclient?
Not currently, no. It returns an error for any trouble communicating
with Emacs, not because of what happens to the info exchanged between
them.
Then could it not easily happen that the source of the problem is not
detected? Is not that an argument for beeing able to get a traceback the
way I suggested?
_______________________________________________
emacs-pretest-bug mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-pretest-bug
