Martin Buchholz <martin(a)xemacs.org> writes:
No!
The old code carefully UNGCPRO'ed, and then used the unprotected
variables.
RETURN_UNCGPRO is not just syntactic sugar here. It evaluates the
call to call3, during which time GCPRO is still in effect, then
UNGCPROs and returns the result.
Yes, but Gunnat's point is that call3() itself with GCPRO the object
pointed to by &handler. And all its other arguments, for that matter.
Which is, judging from the sources, quite true.