Re: What is a crash?

Dan Eble <[email protected]> writes:

> 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) |

If there is a need for it, I am fine with distinguishing this at the
label level.

-- 
David Kastrup