From 3f4e02f41c3c7cc5e7ff17a1043d5642e0de62fc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: rtoy <rtoy> Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 13:50:16 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] In PREPROCESS-FOR-EVAL, don't signal a debug condition when there are no debug-variable information because that prevents the user from evaluating other stuff. Leave a warning in, but maybe we should remove this as well? --- code/debug-int.lisp | 10 ++++++++-- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/code/debug-int.lisp b/code/debug-int.lisp index 3196762b3..ecdedcc4f 100644 --- a/code/debug-int.lisp +++ b/code/debug-int.lisp @@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ ;;; Carnegie Mellon University, and has been placed in the public domain. ;;; (ext:file-comment - "$Header: /Volumes/share2/src/cmucl/cvs2git/cvsroot/src/code/debug-int.lisp,v 1.113 2004/08/30 14:55:38 rtoy Exp $") + "$Header: /Volumes/share2/src/cmucl/cvs2git/cvsroot/src/code/debug-int.lisp,v 1.114 2004/10/13 13:50:16 rtoy Exp $") ;;; ;;; ********************************************************************** ;;; @@ -3785,7 +3785,13 @@ (let ((n-frame (gensym)) (fun (code-location-debug-function loc))) (unless (debug-variable-info-available fun) - (debug-signal 'no-debug-variables :debug-function fun)) + ;;; Do we really want to signal this? This prevents the + ;;; debugger repl from evaluating other things that might be + ;;; useful that doesn't refer to local vars. A warning, + ;;; however, might still be useful. + #+nil + (debug-signal 'no-debug-variables :debug-function fun) + (warn "~&~S has no debug-variable information." fun)) (ext:collect ((binds) (symbol-macros) (special-binds)) (do-debug-function-variables (var fun) (let ((validity (debug-variable-validity var loc))) -- GitLab