bug#69953: [PATCH] Remove duplicated asserts and checks

[Eli Zaretskii]

Ping! Philipp and Daniel, do you have any comments on this?

> Cc: Philipp Stephani <phst@google.com>, 69953@debbugs.gnu.org,
>  Daniel Colascione <dancol@dancol.org>
> Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2024 09:15:04 +0200
> From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
> 
> > Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2024 03:27:34 +0000
> > From: Sergey Vinokurov <serg.foo@gmail.com>
> > 
> > I noticed that emacs-module.c contains duplicate 
> > module_non_local_exit_check() checks and 
> > module_assert_thread/module_assert_env asserts, mostly performed at the 
> > same point in program sequentially.
> > 
> > The module_non_local_exit_check() checks happen in 
> > MODULE_HANDLE_NONLOCAL_EXIT and MODULE_FUNCTION_BEGIN_NO_CATCH macros. 
> > The MODULE_HANDLE_NONLOCAL_EXIT is never used by itself, only as part of 
> > MODULE_FUNCTION_BEGIN which starts with MODULE_FUNCTION_BEGIN_NO_CATCH 
> > that performs the check.
> > 
> > In addition, there're 6 "Implementation of runtime and environment 
> > functions" rules outlined where MODULE_HANDLE_NONLOCAL_EXIT should be 
> > called at step 4 but module_non_local_exit_check() is supposed to have 
> > already happened at step 3 so documentation does not seem to intend for 
> > the check to be repeated in MODULE_HANDLE_NONLOCAL_EXIT.
> > 
> > Regarding asserts my observation is that module_non_local_exit_check() 
> > already contains module_assert_thread and module_assert_env so there's 
> > no need to do asserts if first thing we do is call 
> > module_non_local_exit_check.
> 
> Thanks, but why is that a problem?  module_assertions is false by
> default, and the function to turn on module assertions is not even
> documented in the ELisp manual.  IOW, this is a debugging aid which
> will rarely if at all activated, and if it is, that's on purpose by
> the programmer who is investigating some tricky problem.  Why is it a
> problem to have too many assertions, which might help that programmer
> find a bug?
> 
> I added Daniel and Philipp to the discussion, in case they have
> comments to this proposal.
> 
> 
> 
>