Need help about octave integration on emacs 24.3

Need help about octave integration on emacs 24.3

[Li Shuai]

Dear members:

I was trying to run run-octave to activate octave in emacs. However, the
command stuck and octave process seems not get started well. I tried to
debug the code and had found it stuck at this line 200 ofoctave-inf.el:

    (while inferior-octave-receive-in-progress
      (accept-process-output inferior-octave-process))

My platform is Ubuntu 14.04. Emacs version is 24.3. I used the program in
the source of ubuntu, did not compile myself. Octave version is 3.8.1, also
from source of ubuntu, did not compile myself. Octave works fine.

Since octave mode has been built in, there is no configure relevant to the
question, I guess, so I does not post my configure for octave.

Has anyone met the same problem? Any suggestions to fix it?

Shuai

Best

Re: Need help about octave integration on emacs 24.3

[Leo Liu]

On 2014-11-24 23:22 +0800, Li Shuai wrote:
> Any suggestions to fix it?

Use octave.el from emacs git repo. Should work on 24.x.

Leo

Re: Need help about octave integration on emacs 24.3

[Li Shuai]

Thanks, emacs fellow. I have tried to use the octave.el from emacs 24.4.
This is what I did:

1. Download octave.el from emacs 24.4 source
2. Put it where emacs can search for.
3. Delete octave-mod.elc and octave-inf.elc in the origin distribution.

But I got the following error:

Cannot open load file: octave-mod

I guess I need more change than that. What should I do?

On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 1:02 AM, Leo Liu <sdl.web@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 2014-11-24 23:22 +0800, Li Shuai wrote:
> > Any suggestions to fix it?
>
> Use octave.el from emacs git repo. Should work on 24.x.
>
> Leo
>
>
>

Re: Need help about octave integration on emacs 24.3

[Leo Liu]

On 2014-11-25 10:25 +0800, Li Shuai wrote:
> Thanks, emacs fellow. I have tried to use the octave.el from emacs 24.4.
> This is what I did:
>
> 1. Download octave.el from emacs 24.4 source
> 2. Put it where emacs can search for.
> 3. Delete octave-mod.elc and octave-inf.elc in the origin distribution.
>
> But I got the following error:
>
> Cannot open load file: octave-mod
>
> I guess I need more change than that. What should I do?

It could be that you configured emacs to load octave-mod.el. octave-mod
and octave.inf are merged into one file octave.el. Try the test with
`emacs -q' i.e. without loading your init file.

Leo

Re: Need help about octave integration on emacs 24.3

[Li Shuai]

It could be that you configured emacs to load octave-mod.el. octave-mod
and octave.inf are merged into one file octave.el. Try the test with
`emacs -q’ i.e. without loading your init file.

I think the file name is built in in emacs, and I have tried start emacs
with -q. The same result.

Also, I have tried to grep the source of emacs 24.3, and did not find any
places where octave-mod gets loaded. Actually, in my limited knowledge
emacs does not match file names, it only search for (provide ‘octave-mod).
I do not understand why emacs is trying to load the file octave-mod.el this
time.

Am I wrong?
​

On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 10:25 AM, Li Shuai <lishuai918@gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks, emacs fellow. I have tried to use the octave.el from emacs 24.4.
> This is what I did:
>
> 1. Download octave.el from emacs 24.4 source
> 2. Put it where emacs can search for.
> 3. Delete octave-mod.elc and octave-inf.elc in the origin distribution.
>
> But I got the following error:
>
> Cannot open load file: octave-mod
>
> I guess I need more change than that. What should I do?
>
> On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 1:02 AM, Leo Liu <sdl.web@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2014-11-24 23:22 +0800, Li Shuai wrote:
>> > Any suggestions to fix it?
>>
>> Use octave.el from emacs git repo. Should work on 24.x.
>>
>> Leo
>>
>>
>>
>

Re: Need help about octave integration on emacs 24.3

[Stefan Monnier]

> I think the file name is built in in emacs, and I have tried start emacs
> with -q. The same result.

It is: there's an autoload of the `octave-mode' function which fetches
the function from `octave-mod'.  So you either have to overwrite it with
your own autoload, or you can simply (load "octave") which will
overwrite the autoload with the actual function.


        Stefan

Re: Need help about octave integration on emacs 24.3

[Leo Liu]

On 2014-11-25 09:12 -0500, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> It is: there's an autoload of the `octave-mode' function which fetches
> the function from `octave-mod'.  So you either have to overwrite it with
> your own autoload, or you can simply (load "octave") which will
> overwrite the autoload with the actual function.

Indeed. In other words put (require 'octave) in your init file.

Leo

Re: Need help about octave integration on emacs 24.3

[Li Shuai]

>
> This is the first time I try to ask for help from community instead of
> always trying to solve it by myself or delay the solving. Pretty nice
> experience. I did not expect it to be solved so quickly. Thanks again!
>
> Shuai
> Best
>
> On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 11:55 PM, <help-gnu-emacs-request@gnu.org> wrote:
>
>> Send help-gnu-emacs mailing list submissions to
>>         help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>>         https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-gnu-emacs
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>>         help-gnu-emacs-request@gnu.org
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>>         help-gnu-emacs-owner@gnu.org
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of help-gnu-emacs digest..."
>>
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>>    1. Re: Why is it not possible to use "nil" any more in init
>>       files ? (Alexandre Oberlin)
>>    2. Re: Need help about octave integration on emacs 24.3 (Leo Liu)
>>    3. RE: How to truly unbind global bindings? (Drew Adams)
>>    4. RE: When do you prefer frames instead of windows? (Drew Adams)
>>    5. RE: When do you prefer windows instead of frames? Was: When
>>       do you    prefer frames instead of windows? (Drew Adams)
>>    6. RE: When do you prefer frames instead of windows? (Drew Adams)
>>    7. RE: When do you prefer frames instead of windows? (Drew Adams)
>>    8. RE: When do you prefer frames instead of windows?
>>       (Gian Uberto Lauri)
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 16:07:39 +0100
>> From: "Alexandre Oberlin" <email_via_web@migo.info>
>> To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
>> Subject: Re: Why is it not possible to use "nil" any more in init
>>         files ?
>> Message-ID: <op.xpvyy1fofjdmwo@tournesol>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; delsp=yes
>>
>> Thanks Phillip for your answer.
>>
>> You wrote:
>> >> From my perspective, most people who write
>> > (hated-mode nil)
>> > are likely to be able to work out what is happening, while someone who
>> > accidentally writes
>> > (wanted-mode)
>> > and later
>> > (wanted-mode)
>> > has a more pernicuous problem.
>>
>> So the toggling functions have been broken too!? Anyway I?d say most such
>> users don?t write, they just click/touch.
>>
>> Now do you mean that for emacs developers too, unlearned user mistakes
>> driven interfacing has become the guiding principle? I use *n?x systems
>> because I preferred to learn a few things from the start and then know
>> what happens and get what I want. Now this is more and more difficult as
>> the (supposed) average behaviour of occasional users rules (and constantly
>> changes, as well as its perception by new developers). Users who need to
>> work productively are getting nervous because they don?t have time to
>> spend playing with their configurations at each new release of any piece
>> of software. Breaking backward compatibility had always been a NONO, even
>> at Microsoft.
>>
>> IMHO this "intuitive" paradigm is OK for phones/tablets, at least if some
>> consensus can be found. And we all know that casual users will more and
>> more use phones/tablets, not computers any more. As for the more motivated
>> users, they should rather be helped with some good principles and
>> tutorials, and not the developers adapt to their initial shortcomings.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>>
>> Alexandre
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, 25 Nov 2014 14:50:22 +0100, Phillip Lord
>> <phillip.lord@newcastle.ac.uk> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > Clearly, if the interface has changed it runs the risk of breaking some
>> > statements which were previously fulfilling the programmers intent.
>> > This, of course, is irritating for those affected, but that doesn't make
>> > it wrong.
>> >
>> >> From my perspective, most people who write
>> >
>> > (hated-mode nil)
>> >
>> > are likely to be able to work out what is happening, while someone who
>> > accidentally writes
>> >
>> > (wanted-mode)
>> >
>> > and later
>> >
>> > (wanted-mode)
>> >
>> > has a more pernicuous problem.
>> >
>> > I always used
>> >
>> > (hated-mode 0)
>> >
>> > which seems to be more intuitive than passing nil. Perhaps this is why
>> > the change did not irritate me.
>> >
>> >
>> > Alexandre Oberlin <email_via_web@migo.info> writes:
>> >
>> >> Thanks Stefan for this explanation. So IIUC that trick broke some
>> >> correct
>> >> .emacs in order to magically fix some broken ones?
>> >>
>> >> Alexandre
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Sat, 22 Nov 2014 15:37:04 +0100, Stefan Monnier
>> >> <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>>> I know that departing from proven approaches for no sensible reason
>> >>>> is top
>> >>>> of the art but is there any kind of other rationale to make the thing
>> >>>> not
>> >>>> backward-compatible?
>> >>>
>> >>> Of course, there's a reason: All minor modes since Emacs-23 (IIRC)
>> >>> should turn themselves ON when called with a nil argument, so you
>> don't
>> >>> need turn-on-FOO-mode and you can just say:
>> >>>
>> >>>    (add-hook 'bar-mode-hook 'foo-mode)
>> >>>
>> >>> The better part of this incompatible change is that it silently
>> *fixed*
>> >>> many people's .emacs since many people already used:
>> >>>
>> >>>    (add-hook 'bar-mode-hook 'foo-mode)
>> >>>
>> >>> without realizing that this could actually turn the mode OFF in
>> >>> some cases.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>         Stefan
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 23:26:09 +0800
>> From: Leo Liu <sdl.web@gmail.com>
>> To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
>> Subject: Re: Need help about octave integration on emacs 24.3
>> Message-ID: <87lhmzl2su.fsf@gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain
>>
>> On 2014-11-25 09:12 -0500, Stefan Monnier wrote:
>> > It is: there's an autoload of the `octave-mode' function which fetches
>> > the function from `octave-mod'.  So you either have to overwrite it with
>> > your own autoload, or you can simply (load "octave") which will
>> > overwrite the autoload with the actual function.
>>
>> Indeed. In other words put (require 'octave) in your init file.
>>
>> Leo
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 3
>> Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 07:43:29 -0800 (PST)
>> From: Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com>
>> To: Alexander Shukaev <haroogan@gmail.com>, help-gnu-emacs
>>         <help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org>
>> Subject: RE: How to truly unbind global bindings?
>> Message-ID: <c2d9b801-f3c8-4c2f-912b-e6b4ceca5019@default>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>>
>> > The answer was:
>> > (use-global-map (make-sparse-keymap))
>>
>> Why do you want to do this?  (Doesn't sound advisable, to me.)
>>
>> Perhaps if you describe your use case/scenario, people will
>> have something useful to suggest.  I cannot imagine why anyone
>> would try to replace the `global-map' with a new, sparse keymap.
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 4
>> Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 07:46:19 -0800 (PST)
>> From: Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com>
>> To: Gian Uberto Lauri <saint@eng.it>
>> Cc: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org, Raffaele Ricciardi <rfflrccrd@gmail.com>
>> Subject: RE: When do you prefer frames instead of windows?
>> Message-ID: <db3cc1ca-53b7-472d-ad8c-258e97d1650f@default>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>>
>> >  > I would ask an opposite question: IF you could use Emacs frames
>> >  > as easily as you can use Emacs windows, in what scenarios would
>> >  > you prefer using Emacs windows, and why?
>> >
>> > ...mail reading, sql interaction and when working on two parts of
>> > the same file or two files with a macro...
>> >
>> > If the frames could really be used like windows, then, it could be
>> > that I would be comfortable with separate frames.
>>
>> That was the question.  "IF you could use frames as easily as you
>> can use Emacs windows..."  I certainly agree that currently you
>> cannot, especially with just vanilla Emacs.  But if you could...
>>
>> > create several WindowMaker application icons with a single Emacs
>> > instance, and using a different image for each application icon.
>>
>> That sounds like something that would pertain only to certain
>> platforms, since different platforms have different notions of
>> "icon" etc.  But the ability you mention sounds like it might
>> be useful.
>>
>> > This was nice because that let me associate a certain frame with a
>> > certain workspace (i.e. e-mail on workspace 1 and db-interaction on
>> > workspace 6) and use a click on the application icon to jump to that
>> > workspace.
>>
>> FYI, you can use bookmarks to similar effect.  With Bookmark+ you
>> can just jump to this or that desktop bookmark, to change between
>> Emacs "workspaces", as defined by desktop.el.  And it doesn't
>> matter whether you use one frame or 37 frames for such a workspace.
>>
>> http://www.emacswiki.org/BookmarkPlus#DesktopBookmarks
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 5
>> Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 07:46:58 -0800 (PST)
>> From: Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com>
>> To: dieter@duenenhof-wilhelm.de, help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
>> Subject: RE: When do you prefer windows instead of frames? Was: When
>>         do you  prefer frames instead of windows?
>> Message-ID: <c9986f7f-949b-44d5-b62c-6eac8c9d24f5@default>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>>
>> > > I would ask an opposite question: IF you could use Emacs frames
>> > > as easily as you can use Emacs windows, in what scenarios would
>> > > you prefer using Emacs windows, and why?
>> >
>> > For supporting tasks only: Imagine you are starting from a full-screen
>> > window and want to see temporarily a variable definition in a second
>> > window while still hacking away.  The advantage is that window
>> > operations, like C-x } enlarge-window-horizontally,
>> > delete-other-windows-vertically,... operate simultaneously on all
>> > windows.  In such situations it seems to me much more convenient to
>> > use windows than set it up with frames.
>>
>> Again - but what "IF you could use Emacs frames as easily as you
>> can use Emacs windows"?  That's the question.
>>
>> Pop up a *Help* frame instead of a *Help* window to show help.  Hit
>> `C-x 0' to get rid of that frame when you're done.  You probably do
>> not need to resize the frame (e.g., if the frame is automatically
>> fit to the size of just the *Help* text).  But if you do, then use
>> keys to resize it, just as you would for a window.
>>
>> IOW, think past what you can do with a window (resize, move, control
>> where it pops up, etc.) that you think you cannot easily do with a
>> frame now.
>>
>> I certainly agree that if frames are not made as convenient to
>> interact with (i.e., the same kinds of operations you use on
>> windows) then Emacs windows remain useful.  But if Emacs *did*
>> support such operations with frames, out of the box,...
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 6
>> Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 07:47:10 -0800 (PST)
>> From: Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com>
>> To: Ralf Fassel <ralfixx@gmx.de>, help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
>> Subject: RE: When do you prefer frames instead of windows?
>> Message-ID: <4a56056d-6a48-48ea-a80f-448057dce7f4@default>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>>
>> > Single frame for Ediff: A on top, B in the middle, Control at
>> > bottom.  The separate control frame is a nuisance with
>> > focus-follows-mouse, it almost always is out of focus, loses
>> > the cursor, or misbehaves in other fashions...
>>
>> Seems like that is something that could be fixed.  Have you
>> thought about filing a bug report / enhancement request?
>> (`M-x report-emacs-bug')
>>
>> FWIW, I've been using Ediff with separate frames for decades,
>> and I don't have any such problem.  But I don't use
>> `focus-follows-mouse'.
>>
>> In principle, Ediff should play well with separate frames.
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 7
>> Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 07:47:24 -0800 (PST)
>> From: Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com>
>> To: Rainer M Krug <Rainer@krugs.de>
>> Cc: Raffaele Ricciardi <rfflrccrd@gmail.com>, help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org,
>>         Robert Thorpe <rt@robertthorpeconsulting.com>
>> Subject: RE: When do you prefer frames instead of windows?
>> Message-ID: <e48501bd-b9a2-48a9-bd1e-41381fc40a99@default>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>>
>> > > You need to be able to do the same kinds of things with frames
>> > > that you can do with Emacs windows - *from the keyboard* (and with
>> > > a mouse). Including move around incrementally, resize
>> > > incrementally, cycle/choose, tile/split, and so on.
>> > >
>> > > I use Emacs that way, but as I say, this is not provided out of
>> > > the box with `emacs -Q'.  (It should be, IMO.)
>> >
>> > You are throwing teaser around - is your emacs config some=where
>> > on=ine, so that I could take a look at your configuration regarding
>> > frames?
>>
>> I really did not mean it that way.  I'm more interested here in
>> looking at the use cases that people might think really apply to
>> Emacs windows inherently.
>>
>> It's about a thought experiment: WHAT IF you could easily do with
>> frames what you do with windows, using the keyboard (or the mouse)?
>> Would you still see some scenarios where you would prefer to use
>> a window?  If so, what would they be?
>>
>> I do use code that tries to make frames more convenient to use, but
>> that really is beside the point of my question.  What I would like
>> is for vanilla Emacs to provide frame-friendly manipulation.
>>
>> I do understand that Emacs does not have real control over
>> window-manager windows (i.e., frames); it can only request/suggest
>> changes to be made by the window manager.  And different platforms
>> & window managers are different, so it is likely that there would
>> never be a 100% cross-platform solution with the level of control
>> that we have with Emacs windows.
>>
>> Still, I know from my own experience that it is possible to obtain
>> pretty much all of the control I expect, at least across GNU/Linux,
>> UNIX, and MS Windows - I can't vouch for others.
>>
>>
>> [If you do want to try the code I use, just to get an idea of what
>> I mean, look here: http://www.emacswiki.org/OneOnOneEmacs.
>> But again, I'm *not* proposing such code as the solution or even
>> as *a* solution to the problem of easily doing with frames what
>> you do with Emacs windows.  This is code that I use to try to
>> overcome the problem, imperfectly.  That's all.]
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 8
>> Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 16:54:54 +0100
>> From: "Gian Uberto Lauri" <saint@eng.it>
>> To: Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com>
>> Cc: Raffaele Ricciardi <rfflrccrd@gmail.com>, help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org,
>>         Gian Uberto Lauri <saint@eng.it>
>> Subject: RE: When do you prefer frames instead of windows?
>> Message-ID: <21620.42574.322318.854514@mail.eng.it>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>>
>> Drew Adams writes:
>>  > >  > I would ask an opposite question: IF you could use Emacs frames
>>  > >  > as easily as you can use Emacs windows, in what scenarios would
>>  > >  > you prefer using Emacs windows, and why?
>>  > >
>>  > > ...mail reading, sql interaction and when working on two parts of
>>  > > the same file or two files with a macro...
>>  > >
>>  > > If the frames could really be used like windows, then, it could be
>>  > > that I would be comfortable with separate frames.
>>  >
>>  > That was the question.  "IF you could use frames as easily as you
>>  > can use Emacs windows..."  I certainly agree that currently you
>>  > cannot, especially with just vanilla Emacs.  But if you could...
>>
>> Frankly, the answer is "I can't answer until I see it working".
>> But it could be yes, especially if it changes my habits only slightly.
>>
>>  > FYI, you can use bookmarks to similar effect.  With Bookmark+ you
>>  > can just jump to this or that desktop bookmark, to change between
>>  > Emacs "workspaces", as defined by desktop.el.  And it doesn't
>>  > matter whether you use one frame or 37 frames for such a workspace.
>>  >
>>  > http://www.emacswiki.org/BookmarkPlus#DesktopBookmarks
>>
>> I will give it a look, thank you!
>>
>> --
>>  /\           ___                                    Ubuntu: ancient
>> /___/\_|_|\_|__|___Gian Uberto Lauri_____               African word
>>   //--\| | \|  |   Integralista GNUslamico            meaning "I can
>> \/                 coltivatore diretto di software       not install
>>      gi? sistemista a tempo (altrui) perso...                Debian"
>>
>> Warning: gnome-config-daemon considered more dangerous than GOTO
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> help-gnu-emacs mailing list
>> help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
>> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-gnu-emacs
>>
>>
>> End of help-gnu-emacs Digest, Vol 144, Issue 66
>> ***********************************************
>>
>
>