Re: Dynamic modules: emacs-module.c and signaling errors

[Daniel Colascione]

On 11/24/2015 11:23 PM, Paul Eggert wrote:
> Daniel Colascione wrote:
>> How is it any worse than checking whether open(2) returns -1?
> 
> 'open' probes the outside world, and programs should be prepared for
> such probes to fail. In contrast, 'cons' is basic memory allocation,
> just as calling a function is basic memory allocation. We don't require
> programs to check each function call to see whether the call failed
> because the stack was exhausted. Similarly we don't require programs to
> check each call to 'cons' to see whether 'cons' failed because the heap
> was exhausted.

I don't believe in treating memory specially. It's just another
resource. We can exhaust it just like anything else. In elisp, we have
conditions. In a module API, we have to rely on traditional error checking.

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature