calc-dispatch problem

calc-dispatch problem

[Slawomir Nowaczyk]

Hello,

Start emacs --no-init-file --no-site-file

Evaluate (global-set-key (kbd "M-`") 'calc-dispatch)

Press "M-`" twice, *fast*. I get an error "calc-embedded-edit: Expected `)'"

If I press "M-`" slowly, however (with about 1-2 second pause between
first and second keypress), calc opens properly.

Strange. Any ideas?

-- 
 Best wishes,
   Slawomir Nowaczyk
     ( slawomir.nowaczyk.847@student.lu.se )

Hardware: The parts of a computer system that can be kicked.

Re: calc-dispatch problem

[David Kastrup]

Slawomir Nowaczyk <slawomir.nowaczyk.847@student.lu.se> writes:

> Hello,
>
> Start emacs --no-init-file --no-site-file
>
> Evaluate (global-set-key (kbd "M-`") 'calc-dispatch)
>
> Press "M-`" twice, *fast*. I get an error "calc-embedded-edit: Expected `)'"
>
> If I press "M-`" slowly, however (with about 1-2 second pause between
> first and second keypress), calc opens properly.
>
> Strange. Any ideas?

Is this on X11 or a tty?

If it is the latter, this sounds like a function key sequence.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: calc-dispatch problem

[Slawomir Nowaczyk]

On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 20:19:29 +0200
David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> wrote:

#> Slawomir Nowaczyk <slawomir.nowaczyk.847@student.lu.se> writes:
#> 
#> > Hello,
#> >
#> > Start emacs --no-init-file --no-site-file
#> >
#> > Evaluate (global-set-key (kbd "M-`") 'calc-dispatch)
#> >
#> > Press "M-`" twice, *fast*. I get an error "calc-embedded-edit: Expected `)'"
#> >
#> > If I press "M-`" slowly, however (with about 1-2 second pause between
#> > first and second keypress), calc opens properly.
#> >
#> > Strange. Any ideas?
#> 
#> Is this on X11 or a tty?
#> 
#> If it is the latter, this sounds like a function key sequence.

It's on M$ Windows:

In GNU Emacs 22.0.50.1 (i386-msvc-nt5.1.2600)
 of 2006-09-05 on FIONA
X server distributor `Microsoft Corp.', version 5.1.2600
configured using `configure --with-msvc (13.10) --cflags -IM:/EmacsCVS/libraries/include/'

Important settings:
  value of $LC_ALL: nil
  value of $LC_COLLATE: nil
  value of $LC_CTYPE: nil
  value of $LC_MESSAGES: nil
  value of $LC_MONETARY: nil
  value of $LC_NUMERIC: nil
  value of $LC_TIME: nil
  value of $LANG: ENG
  locale-coding-system: cp1252
  default-enable-multibyte-characters: t

Major mode: Lisp Interaction

Minor modes in effect:
  encoded-kbd-mode: t
  tooltip-mode: t
  tool-bar-mode: t
  mouse-wheel-mode: t
  menu-bar-mode: t
  file-name-shadow-mode: t
  global-font-lock-mode: t
  font-lock-mode: t
  blink-cursor-mode: t
  unify-8859-on-encoding-mode: t
  utf-translate-cjk-mode: t
  auto-compression-mode: t
  line-number-mode: t

Recent input:
<return> <S-insert> C-x C-e M-` M-` M-x r e p o r t 
- e m <tab> <return>

Recent messages:
Mark set
Loading edmacro...done
calc-dispatch
Loading calc...done
Loading calc-embed...done
Loading calc-aent...done
calc-embedded-edit: Expected `)'
Loading emacsbug...
Loading regexp-opt...done
Loading emacsbug...done

-- 
 Best wishes,
   Slawomir Nowaczyk
     ( slawomir.nowaczyk.847@student.lu.se )

A little inaccuracy sometimes saves a ton of explanation.

Re: calc-dispatch problem

[Jason Rumney]

Slawomir Nowaczyk <slawomir.nowaczyk.847@student.lu.se> writes:

> Hello,
>
> Start emacs --no-init-file --no-site-file
>
> Evaluate (global-set-key (kbd "M-`") 'calc-dispatch)
>
> Press "M-`" twice, *fast*. I get an error "calc-embedded-edit: Expected `)'"
>
> If I press "M-`" slowly, however (with about 1-2 second pause between
> first and second keypress), calc opens properly.
>
> Strange. Any ideas?

It seems to be deliberate. calc-dispatch uses (sit-for
echo-keystrokes) to wait for further input, then acts differently
depending on what keys were pressed or if the sit-for timed out starts
calc normally. Repeating the keys that invoked calc-dispatch seems to
try to evaluate the current line using calc as far as I can tell.

Re: calc-dispatch problem

[Slawomir Nowaczyk]

On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 21:05:08 +0100
Jason Rumney <jasonr@gnu.org> wrote:

#> > Evaluate (global-set-key (kbd "M-`") 'calc-dispatch)
#> >
#> > Press "M-`" twice, *fast*. I get an error "calc-embedded-edit: Expected `)'"
#> >
#> > If I press "M-`" slowly, however (with about 1-2 second pause between
#> > first and second keypress), calc opens properly.
#> > 
#> > Strange. Any ideas?
#> 
#> It seems to be deliberate. calc-dispatch uses (sit-for
#> echo-keystrokes) to wait for further input, then acts differently
#> depending on what keys were pressed or if the sit-for timed out starts
#> calc normally.

I still find it strange.

So, OK, repeating calc-dispatch key fast does indeed send current line
to some kind of "Calc edit mode"... but only if I *have not* opened calc
before. Once I do "M-`" slowly *once*, it subsequently works even when
typed quickly.

Honestly, it really does look like a bug to me -- at the very least we
should strive for some kind of consistent behaviour.

#> Repeating the keys that invoked calc-dispatch seems to try to
#> evaluate the current line using calc as far as I can tell.

Exactly what calc-dispatch tries to do depends, I think, on what key is
it bound to... it seems like second (quick) keypress is interpreted
according to what calc-dispatch-help, but a second keypress after a
pause wants to toggle calc. Any chance of making this "deliberate
behaviour" customisable?

-- 
 Best wishes,
   Slawomir Nowaczyk
     ( slawomir.nowaczyk.847@student.lu.se )

Be nice to other people--they outnumber you six billion to one.

Re: calc-dispatch problem

[Jay Belanger]

Jason Rumney <jasonr@gnu.org> writes:
> Slawomir Nowaczyk <slawomir.nowaczyk.847@student.lu.se> writes:
...
>> Press "M-`" twice, *fast*. I get an error "calc-embedded-edit: Expected `)'"
>
>> If I press "M-`" slowly, however (with about 1-2 second pause between
>> first and second keypress), calc opens properly.
...
> It seems to be deliberate. calc-dispatch uses (sit-for
> echo-keystrokes) to wait for further input, then acts differently
> depending on what keys were pressed or if the sit-for timed out starts
> calc normally. Repeating the keys that invoked calc-dispatch seems to
> try to evaluate the current line using calc as far as I can tell.

Repeating the keys should start calc up normally.
But `calc-dispatch' followed by "`" or "M-`" normally starts
calc-embedded-edit, and which behavior is used depends on whether or
not the `sit-for' is interrupted or not.
If the `sit-for' is interrupted, then a subsequent call of
`this-command-keys' gets a longer string than if `sit-for' isn't
interrupted.  I don't know what good the `sit-for' is doing; calc
shouldn't behave differently depending on how fast those keys are
pressed.  
The behaviour without the `sit-for' seems the proper behaviour;
perhaps the `sit-for' should be removed.

Jay

Re: calc-dispatch problem

[Slawomir Nowaczyk]

On Mon, 11 Sep 2006 12:48:42 -0500
Jay Belanger <belanger@truman.edu> wrote:

#> Repeating the keys should start calc up normally.

It was also my impression -- but, as I have just noticed, neither doc
string nor manual say that explicitly (they only talk about specific
case of "*" key starting calc)... I think they should be changed to
specifically say that repeating key bound to calc-dispatch should work
even if it has been customised.

#> But `calc-dispatch' followed by "`" or "M-`" normally starts
#> calc-embedded-edit, and which behavior is used depends on whether or
#> not the `sit-for' is interrupted or not. If the `sit-for' is
#> interrupted, then a subsequent call of `this-command-keys' gets a
#> longer string than if `sit-for' isn't interrupted.

Thanks for the explanation.

#> I don't know what good the `sit-for' is doing; calc shouldn't behave
#> differently depending on how fast those keys are pressed.

I agree!

#> The behaviour without the `sit-for' seems the proper behaviour;
#> perhaps the `sit-for' should be removed.

Sounds good to me.

-- 
 Best wishes,
   Slawomir Nowaczyk
     ( slawomir.nowaczyk.847@student.lu.se )

Most common use of Brutal Sarcasm (tm) in Computer Science is:
  "It's a feature."

Re: calc-dispatch problem

[Jay Belanger]

Slawomir Nowaczyk <slawomir.nowaczyk.847@student.lu.se> writes:
...
> #> The behaviour without the `sit-for' seems the proper behaviour;
> #> perhaps the `sit-for' should be removed.
>
> Sounds good to me.

This has been done in cvs.

Jay