On Mon, Jun 10 2013, Austin Clements <amdragon@MIT.EDU> wrote: > Quoth Mark Walters on Jun 09 at 10:16 am: >> >> Both of these patches look good to me +1. I was able to reproduce both >> bugs pretty reliably (the first one always unless masked by the second >> one which occurred about half the time). With these patches I cannot >> trigger either. Also all tests pass. >> >> My only tiny concern is I couldn't find any documentation on whether the >> return value of the filter-function matters at all. Austin's original >> fix (via irc) returned t and this returns nil in the failing case (i.e., >> when results-buf is dead). > > Mm, interesting. To be fair, my choice of "t" for the original fix > was completely arbitrary. I think you're right that the Emacs > documentation doesn't have anything to say about the return values of > filter functions. Furthermore, the example filter functions they give > don't have meaningful return values, so I'm pretty sure this is safe. > Also the code that calls the filter discards its result. I also looked this a bit yesterday evening. For example this page http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_node/elisp/Filter-Functions.html discusses only about catching thrown errors -- i.e. no mention about filter function return values. From that I'd draw a conclusion that most probably the return value of filter function is not used for anything. ... and the patch looks good. +1 (removing needs-review) Tomi