Re: callers() and :huh

• Date: Fri, 26 Jan 1996 10:13:55 PST
• From:
  hpa@trantor.storm.net (H. Peter Anvin)
• Content-Type: text
• Newsgroups: local.moo
• Organization: Where Stormnet meets the Internet
• References: <199601261615.LAA00434@arkady.hygnet.com> <96Jan26.090611pdt.19564@silk.parc.xerox.com>

In article <96Jan26.090611pdt.19564@silk.parc.xerox.com>,
Pavel Curtis  <pavel@parc.xerox.com> wrote:
>Seth writes:
>
>This is correct, but apparently less well documented than I had thought.  It
>has always been the case that the :huh() verb was called with `verb' equal to
>the verb-name actually typed on the command line.  As a consequence of this,
>you get the callers() result shown in your message.  Note, however, that
>programmers who write code to walk the callers() result should already be more
>careful in what they assume.  The verbs indicated in that stack listing may no
>longer exist, any or all of the verb-location, this, or programmer objects may
>not be valid, etc.  The inclusion in 1.8.0 of entries for built-in function
>calls in the result of callers() (for which both verb-location and this are
>#-1) has already tickled a number of bugs like this in LambdaCore.
>

Maybe we could have callers() optionally(?) include the verb number,
or 0 if not available?

	-hpa

-- 
PGP public key available - finger hpa@terminus.storm.net
"The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens."  --  Bahá'u'lláh
GE/CS 3.1 d- s-:- a- C++++ ULIS++++$ P+++ L++++>+++++ E++ W++ N++ o+ K
w--- O@ M V- PGP+ t+ 5++ X? R@ tv- b++ DI++++ D++(+) G e++ h- r-- y-

• callers() and :huh
• From: "Seth I. Rich" <sir@po.cwru.edu>
• Re: callers() and :huh
• From: Pavel Curtis <pavel@parc.xerox.com>

• Prev: Re: callers() and :huh
• Next: callers() bug in 1.8a5
• Index: MOO-cows
• Thread: MOO-cows