GNU bug report logs -
#46750
calc defmath let* behaviour surprising, inconsistent, or wrong
Previous Next
Full log
View this message in rfc822 format
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Your bug report
#46750: calc defmath let* behaviour surprising, inconsistent, or wrong
which was filed against the emacs package, has been closed.
The explanation is attached below, along with your original report.
If you require more details, please reply to 46750 <at> debbugs.gnu.org.
--
46750: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=46750
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs <at> gnu.org with problems
[Message part 2 (message/rfc822, inline)]
5 mars 2021 kl. 11.49 skrev Stephan Neuhaus <stephan.neuhaus <at> zhaw.ch>:
> I can confirm that the calc that's in the current master branch (development version for 28.1) fixes my problem. You hinted that there were further problems too, but I have only checked that let* now seems to work as intended. Also, to be fair, I have checked that only for my own use case.
Thanks for checking! Marking the bug as closed then.
> Now I'll have to decide whether to build emacs for Debian myself or whether to wait for Debian to adopt emacs >= 28.1.
Well, Emacs release cycles are not known for their brisk pacing; you would have to wait for quite a while. (And obviously, we don't mind more people testing the development versions!)
[Message part 3 (message/rfc822, inline)]
Dear maintainers
I can't seem to understand the calc documentation, or I may have found a
bug. You decide :-)
My system
"GNU Emacs 26.1 (build 2, x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, GTK+ Version 3.24.5)
of 2019-09-23, modified by Debian"
I'm trying to define a calc function f() for use in org mode. Here is a
minimal example of what I've tried. It's not the same function, but it
exhibits the same behaviour. Put this text in a buffer with org mode:
#+BEGIN_SRC emacs-lisp
(defmath f(x)
(let* ((m x)
(n (+ m 1)))
n))
#+END_SRC
#+RESULTS:
: calcFunc-f
| x | y |
|-----+--------|
| 1.0 | f(1.) |
| 1.5 | f(1.5) |
| 2.0 | f(2.) |
| 2.5 | f(2.5) |
| 3.0 | f(3.) |
| 3.5 | f(3.5) |
| 4.0 | f(4.) |
| 4.5 | f(4.5) |
| 5.0 | f(5.) |
#+TBLFM: $2=f($1)
Evaluating the source block (C-c C-c on END_SRC) defines f()
successfully. Then hitting C-c C-c on the TBLFM line shoud result in the
y column of the table to be filled with the x column, plus 1, which it
doesn't.
If I directly evaluate x + 1, it works:
#+BEGIN_SRC emacs-lisp
(defmath f(x)
(+ x 1))
#+END_SRC
#+RESULTS:
: calcFunc-f
| x | y |
|-----+-----|
| 1.0 | 2. |
| 1.5 | 2.5 |
| 2.0 | 3. |
| 2.5 | 3.5 |
| 3.0 | 4. |
| 3.5 | 4.5 |
| 4.0 | 5. |
| 4.5 | 5.5 |
| 5.0 | 6. |
#+TBLFM: $2=f($1)
It seems to me that the problem is with the let* special form, which
simply doesn't seem to work. let works:
#+BEGIN_SRC emacs-lisp
(defmath f(x)
(let ((n (+ x 2)))
n))
#+END_SRC
#+RESULTS:
: calcFunc-f
| x | y |
|-----+-----|
| 1.0 | 3. |
| 1.5 | 3.5 |
| 2.0 | 4. |
| 2.5 | 4.5 |
| 3.0 | 5. |
| 3.5 | 5.5 |
| 4.0 | 6. |
| 4.5 | 6.5 |
| 5.0 | 7. |
#+TBLFM: $2=f($1)
I couldn't find anything in the documentation that would forbid me from
using let* in the body of a defmath. I also couldn't find anything that
would explain this behaviour. Now I'm not an expert on Lisp, so it's
entirely possible that I've done something stupid, or missed something
in the documentation, but I can't find out what it might be.
Thank you very much for Emacs. After several years of using other
editors, I'm coming back to Emacs and I don't think I'll leave it again.
Well, except maybe for ed(1). Ed is the standard editor.
Cheers
Stephan
PS: I'm following the instructions in the calc manual for filing a bug.
There is no mention of a mailing list or a bug tracker for me to sign up
to, so I'd be grateful if you could answer this email, otherwise I might
miss requests for more information or the announcement of a resolution.
This bug report was last modified 4 years and 160 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.