Ar an t-ochtú lá déag de mí na Nollaig, scríobh Stephen J. Turnbull: 

 > QUERY
 > 
 > Aidan Kehoe writes:
 > 
 >  > Anyway, given that we know it's happened, and that the _trapping_problems
 >  > code should prevent it happening in the future, does anyone have any
 >  > objections to this? 
 > 
 > Yes.  We *want* bugs that we don't understand to happen, so that we
 > can diagnose and fix them.  I think this should be an
 > assert(!in_redisplay) or whatever the idiom is.  Or if
 > _trapping_problems has an abort option, use it.
 > 
 > If we discover a valid reason for delete_frame to get called in
 > redisplay,

My point was that Thomas just did. We don’t know the details, and would be
very lucky to learn them, but I’m pretty sure he didn’t attach to the
process with a debugger, put a breakpoint in redisplay, and call
delete_frame_internal himself. Unless those wily SXEmacs folk put him up to
it to sabotage our development.

 > then we will need to condition on that to prevent the
 > hook from being called.  Or, more likely, find a way to postpone the
 > delete_frame until we're out of the redisplay critical section.