Re: X error handler

[Chong Yidong]

Richard Stallman <address@hidden> writes:

>     It seems to me cleaner to make the protocol error handler do nothing
>     by default (rather than kill Emacs).  When x_catch_errors is on, we
>     can carry out the current behavior, i.e., storing the error string
>     etc.
>
> This might be a good idea, but I tend to think there must have been
> some reason for writing the code originally not to do so.
>
> Can anyone think of a drawback for this?
>
> One possible drawback is that bugs get ignored rather than fixed.
> But I am not sure that really matters.

We can always make the default error handler print to stderr when
ENABLE_CHECKING is on.

But since this seems like a non-trivial change, and doesn't fix any
bug, I guess we can put it off till after the release.