On 2026-08-17 09:00, David Kastrup wrote:
Instead of haggling over the definition of "Crash", maybe we should
create explicit categories for the kinds of fifth wall breakage we want
to see treated separately?
In another message sent around the same time as yours, I suggested,
I could create a new label ("Error" or whatever you'd
prefer) for non-crash error handling: false positives,
false negatives, confusing messages, etc. I'm not a
fan of having many labels, but if people would want to
search for such issues in a category apart from "Defect",
then it would be useful.
I would like to be able to search for OS termination issues apart from
unhandled Scheme exceptions. You said that you consider unhandled
Scheme exceptions crashes. That's fine, but a person labeling issues
needs to know whether you want to be able to search for them as a
distinct category. What do you think of this?
| Error::OS | a segfault, out-of-memory crash, etc. |
| Error::Scheme | an unhandled Scheme exception |
| Error::Other | an error reported through the lilypond
diagnostics layer or a false negative |
| Defect | "a problem in the core program" (as now) |
--
Dan
