5:56 p.m.
Hello
For years I used Jari Aaltos tiny tools. One of them allow
to insert paired expression like () []
etc. It works in 21.4 but in 21.5 it only works in an empty
line, if the line contains a word than an error occurs whose
bug trace I attach.
I don't understand the error trace.
Uwe Brauer
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
2:16 a.m.
Uwe Brauer writes:
I don't understand the error trace.
Clearly there's a nil that shouldn't be there, but how it gets there,
whether it's wrong value for something else or is garbage inserted at
the beginning of a list, is buried in the definitions of
tipa-self-insert or tipa-word-pair.
There have been a rash of these "not a <something>: nil" bugs, but I
don't know what causes them.
AFAICT tipa is not a library in the XEmacs packages. Please post the
code you are using so we know what we're working with here.
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
9:45 a.m.
> Regarding tipa paired parenthesis bug in 21.5; "Stephen J.
Turnbull" <stephen(a)xemacs.org> adds:
Uwe Brauer writes:
AFAICT tipa is not a library in the XEmacs packages. Please post
the
code you are using so we know what we're working with here.
Sorry! Here comes the code in question is sort of complicated.
(defun tipa-self-insert-command (arg)
"Smart pairing. ARG is repeat count of character."
(interactive "*P")
(let* ((fid "tipa-self-insert-command: ")
(nbr (prefix-numeric-value arg))
(word-pair tipa-:automatic-word-pairing)
(ch last-command-char)
(elt (assoc ch tipa-:alist))
(pair-allow (if (fboundp tipa-:all-pairing-disabled-function)
(funcall tipa-:all-pairing-disabled-function)
t))
(pair nil) ;pair control
(status 1) ;see user configuration CHAR-FUNC
direction ;character looking at cmd
ch-func ;character function
ch-beg
ch-end
syntax-now
ch-now
)
(tipa-debug fid 'ARG arg 'CHAR (char-to-string ch) ch
'PAIR-ALLOW-FLAG pair-allow
'MODE major-mode
'ELT elt)
(cond
((null elt) ;Not defined for pairing
(self-insert-command nbr))
((null pair-allow)
(turn-off-tipa-mode)
(self-insert-command nbr))
(t
;; ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .. do pairing . .
(setq ch-beg (tipa-elt-beg elt))
(setq ch-end (tipa-elt-end elt))
(setq ch-func (tipa-elt-func elt))
(setq syntax-now (char-syntax (setq ch-now (following-char))))
(if (fboundp ch-func)
(setq status (funcall ch-func ch-beg ch-end)))
(tipa-debug fid "CH-NOW,END" (char-to-string ch-now)
(char-to-string ch-end)
"STAT, ch-func"
status ch-func
"SYNTAX-NOW" (char-to-string syntax-now)
)
(cond
((integerp status)
(setq direction
(cond
((integerp arg)
(if (> arg -1) nil 'back))
(t ;C-u forward
nil)))
(tipa-debug fid "direction" (or direction 'fwd)
"WORD-PAIR" word-pair)
(cond
;; ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...
((char= ch-now ch-end) ;already pair visible
;; does user want to allow this pairing ?
;; is the end character in "allow" list"
(setq pair t)
(tipa-debug fid "now = End")
)
;; ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...
((char= syntax-now ?\ ) ;whitespace at point
(setq pair t) ;ok, do pairing
(tipa-debug fid "Whitespace 1 1 t")
)
(word-pair
;; ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... words ..
;; the default case
;; handle smart pairing.
(setq pair 'word)
)
(t
(tipa-debug fid "default word")
(setq arg 1 pair t)
)) ;main COND
;; ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... insert chars ? ...
(tipa-debug fid "Doing... ARG; PAIR-flag" arg pair )
(cond
((eq pair 'word)
(tipa-word-pair arg ch-beg ch-end))
(pair
(tipa-word-pair nil ch-beg ch-end))
(t
(insert (ti::s-repeat nbr ch-beg))))
)
;; ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... other status ..
((eq nil status)
(insert ch-beg))
((eq t status)
(insert ch-beg ch-end)
(backward-char 1))
((symbolp status)
nil
))))))
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
11:06 a.m.
Uwe Brauer writes:
>> Regarding tipa paired parenthesis bug in 21.5; "Stephen
J. Turnbull" <stephen(a)xemacs.org> adds:
> Uwe Brauer writes:
> AFAICT tipa is not a library in the XEmacs packages. Please post the
> code you are using so we know what we're working with here.
Sorry! Here comes the code in question is sort of complicated.
(defun tipa-self-insert-command (arg)
[omit boring details]
(cond
((eq pair 'word)
(tipa-word-pair arg ch-beg ch-end))
(pair
(tipa-word-pair nil ch-beg ch-end))
I'm not sure, but this looks like how we got here, so
tipa-self-insert-command is probably behaving correctly:
Debugger entered--Lisp error: (wrong-type-argument characterp nil)
char=(nil ?\))
tipa-word-pair(nil ?\( ?\))
tipa-self-insert-command(nil)
The problem is probably in tipa-word-pair.
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
11:39 a.m.
> Regarding Re: tipa paired parenthesis bug in 21.5; "Stephen
J. Turnbull" <stephen(a)xemacs.org> adds:
Uwe Brauer writes:
> >> Regarding tipa paired parenthesis bug in 21.5; "Stephen
Debugger entered--Lisp error: (wrong-type-argument characterp nil)
char=(nil ?\))
tipa-word-pair(nil ?\( ?\))
tipa-self-insert-command(nil)
The problem is probably in tipa-word-pair.
Sorry for the mess,
I tried to debug tipa-word-pair myself
(the function is attached below)
The error seems to be in
(unless (char= (ti::b-read-char nil 1) ch-end)
However when I tried to debug that function I did not
understand the bug trace.
Please, if this is to messy don't waste your time I might
look for another pkg.
Uwe
(defun tipa-word-pair (arg ch-beg ch-end)
"Insert pair around word(s) ARG times using CH-BEG and CH-END."
(let* ((fid "tipa-word-pair: ")
(pos-flag tipa-:word-positioning)
(pos-func tipa-:word-positioning-function)
ch1 ch2
count
syntax-now syntax-prev
tmp
beg
)
(setq syntax-prev (char-syntax
(or (setq ch1 (or (preceding-char) ?\ ))
?\ )))
(setq syntax-now (char-syntax
(or (setq ch2 (or (following-char) ?\ ))
?\ )))
(tipa-debug fid
"arg" arg
"syntax now; prev"
(char-to-string syntax-now) (char-to-string syntax-prev)
"Is-word-class now" (tipa-word-class-p syntax-now)
"Is-word-class prev" (tipa-word-class-p syntax-prev)
"CH1" (char-to-string ch1) "CH2" (char-to-string ch2)
)
(cond
((and (or (null arg)
(integerp arg))
(tipa-word-class-p syntax-now)
(null (tipa-word-class-p syntax-prev)))
(setq count (if (null arg) 1 arg))
(if (< count 0) ;switch the values
(setq tmp ch-beg ch-beg ch-end ch-end tmp))
(tipa-debug fid "word" count)
(insert ch-beg)
(setq beg (point))
(tipa-move-logical-word count)
(unless (char= (ti::b-read-char nil 1) ch-end)
(insert ch-end))
)
((integerp arg)
(insert (ti::s-repeat arg ch-beg))
)
(t ;default case
(tipa-debug fid "default")
(insert ch-beg ch-end)
(backward-char 1)
(setq pos-flag nil)
))
;; ............................................ cursor positioning ...
(setq tmp nil) ;"status" of call
(and (fboundp pos-func)
(integerp beg)
(setq tmp (funcall pos-func beg ch-beg)))
(tipa-debug fid "cursor>>" beg (fboundp pos-func) tmp)
(cond
((not (null tmp)) ;function handled this.
nil)
((eq 'beg pos-flag)
(and (integerp beg)
(goto-char beg)))
(t
nil))
))
(defun ti::b-read-char (&optional direction distance)
"Read character towards the DIRECTION from current point:
nil = forward, non-nil backward. DISTANCE 0/nil means reading from
current position.
Return:
nbr ,read char value
nil ,if the position is not within `point-min-marker' and
`point-max-marker'."
(let* (
(beg (point-min-marker))
(end (point-max-marker))
(pos (or distance 0))
(dest (if direction (- (point) (1+ pos)) (+ (point) pos)))
(read (if (or (< dest beg) (> dest end)) nil t))
)
(if (null read) nil ;allowed to read ?
(char-after dest))
))
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
12:17 p.m.
Uwe Brauer <oub(a)mat.ucm.es> writes:
>> Regarding Re: tipa paired parenthesis bug in 21.5;
"Stephen
J. Turnbull" <stephen(a)xemacs.org> adds:
> Uwe Brauer writes:
>> >> Regarding tipa paired parenthesis bug in 21.5; "Stephen
Please, if this is to messy don't waste your time I might
look for another pkg.
I know, proven technology and all that stuff, but doesn't the timestamp
of this ChangeLog entry look a bit scary?
1999-09-18 Jari Aalto <jari.aalto(a)cante.net>
[...]
* tinypair.el: Prefix `tipa-' changed to `tinypair-'
Did you try a newer version? The last ChangeLog is from:
2011-04-30 Sat Jari Aalto <jari.aalto(a)cante.net>
Regards
Marcus
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
12:23 p.m.
> Regarding Re: tipa paired parenthesis bug in 21.5; Marcus
Harnisch <marcus.harnisch(a)xemacs.org> adds:
Uwe Brauer <oub(a)mat.ucm.es> writes:
>>> Regarding Re: tipa paired parenthesis bug in 21.5; "Stephen
> J. Turnbull" <stephen(a)xemacs.org> adds:
>
> > Uwe Brauer writes:
> >> >> Regarding tipa paired parenthesis bug in 21.5; "Stephen
>
> Please, if this is to messy don't waste your time I might
> look for another pkg.
I know, proven technology and all that stuff, but doesn't the
timestamp
of this ChangeLog entry look a bit scary?
1999-09-18 Jari Aalto <jari.aalto(a)cante.net>
[...]
* tinypair.el: Prefix `tipa-' changed to `tinypair-'
hm how to did you figure out which version I use? I don't
think I sent the ChangeLog file.
Proven technology etc: well call my old fashioned but I
admit I change version only if
- it contains new cool features I need
- bugs have been eliminated.
What I cannot understand is to break backwards
compatibility. This seems not to be the case for the
tinytools since the culprit is 21.5.
But another example is the new bbdb > 2.34 code, which seems
to include new features (which I don't need for the time
being) but broke deliberately backwards compatibility such
that the format of your old and the new .bbdb file is
incompatible. This sort of things make me really hesitate
to upgrade.
Uwe
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
1:54 p.m.
Uwe Brauer <oub(a)mat.ucm.es> writes:
>> Regarding Re: tipa paired parenthesis bug in 21.5; Marcus
Harnisch
<marcus.harnisch(a)xemacs.org> adds:
> 1999-09-18 Jari Aalto <jari.aalto(a)cante.net>
> [...]
> * tinypair.el: Prefix `tipa-' changed to `tinypair-'
hm how to did you figure out which version I use? I don't
think I sent the ChangeLog file.
No, but all your symbols carry the `tipa'-prefix, which has been changed
to `tinypair' almost 12 years ago. This is just evidence that your file
must be older than that date. How old exactly, I can't tell.
Proven technology etc: well call my old fashioned but
Nothing wrong with that.
I admit I change version only if
[...]
- bugs have been eliminated.
And? What were your findings? I don't use either tool, only Google.
What I cannot understand is to break backwards
compatibility. This seems not to be the case for the
tinytools since the culprit is 21.5.
Perhaps 21.5 exposed a bug in tipa.el, that just didn't manifest itself
in 21.4. Simply upgrading might (perhaps not) be the quickest way to get things
working again.
I agree there is a certain desire to finding the root cause of the issue
eventually. Damn, those priorities...
But another example is the new bbdb > 2.34 code, which seems
to include new features (which I don't need for the time
being) but broke deliberately backwards compatibility such
that the format of your old and the new .bbdb file is
incompatible. This sort of things make me really hesitate
to upgrade.
Did you refer to upgrading bbdb or XEmacs?
Kindly
Marcus
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
2:19 p.m.
> Regarding Re: tipa paired parenthesis bug in 21.5; Marcus
Harnisch <marcus.harnisch(a)xemacs.org> adds:
No, but all your symbols carry the `tipa'-prefix, which has been
changed
to `tinypair' almost 12 years ago. This is just evidence that your file
must be older than that date. How old exactly, I can't tell.
ok
> What I cannot understand is to break backwards
> compatibility. This seems not to be the case for the
> tinytools since the culprit is 21.5.
Perhaps 21.5 exposed a bug in tipa.el, that just didn't manifest
itself
in 21.4. Simply upgrading might (perhaps not) be the quickest way to get things
working again.
That is entirely possible. I am not sure what to do, upgrade
also might cause other problems to pop up...
Did you refer to upgrading bbdb or XEmacs?
Bbdb of course, upgrading from 21.4 to 21.5 has taken me
time and I am still not sure..... (But so it was in the past
from 20.4 to 21.1 to 21.4 (all nomule) to mule...)
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
2:02 p.m.
Uwe Brauer writes:
What I cannot understand is to break backwards compatibility.
http://www.jwz.org/doc/cadt.html :-)
This seems not to be the case for the tinytools since the culprit
is 21.5.
Well, the odds are somewhat against it, but it's quite possible that
tinytools depends on some implementation detail that wasn't part of
the public API.
This is one of the problems that all Emacsen face; everything's open
so people do write code that depends on these arbitrary details.
(Stefan's having an discussion with Juanma about this on emacs-devel
in just the last couple of days.)
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
2:21 p.m.
> Regarding Re: tipa paired parenthesis bug in 21.5; "Stephen
J. Turnbull" <stephen(a)xemacs.org> adds:
Uwe Brauer writes:
> What I cannot understand is to break backwards compatibility.
Hilarious as always. :-D
> This seems not to be the case for the tinytools since the
culprit
> is 21.5.
This is one of the problems that all Emacsen face; everything's
open
so people do write code that depends on these arbitrary details.
(Stefan's having an discussion with Juanma about this on emacs-devel
in just the last couple of days.)
Right. I don't know what to do. Debugging is cumbersome....
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
4901
days inactive
4903
days old
10 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Marcus Harnisch -
Stephen J. Turnbull -
Uwe Brauer