Re: Dynamic modules: emacs-module.c and signaling errors

[Paul Eggert]

Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> It's not obvious to me, sorry.  The costs of the current code are
> minimal, and the advantages to have the "raw" functionality in
> addition to what we have aren't clear-cut.

My admittedly vague impression is that Stefan's approach would be friendlier to 
module authors who want to write code that feels like Emacs's current C code. 
This should be a plus, no?

I don't fully understand why the current emacs-module.c is as complicated as it 
is, to be honest.  I know it has something to do with C++ exception handling, 
but the details still escape me.  But really, we should support C modules well 
too, as C is still the lingua franca for low-level software integration.  And 
"well" does not mean "every time you call a function you then have to call some 
other function to see whether the first function worked".