e

e

[Jean-Christophe Helary]

I was under the impression that e evaluated to 2.71828 or something in Emacs.

I seem to remember that I evaluated it like this a few days ago but then, for some reason, when I try to evaluate it now I get a void-variable error.

Why would that happen ?

Jean-Christophe Helary 

Re: e

[Andreas Schwab]

Jean-Christophe Helary <jean.christophe.helary@gmail.com> writes:

> I was under the impression that e evaluated to 2.71828 or something in Emacs.

It's called float-e.

Andreas.

-- 
Andreas Schwab, SUSE Labs, schwab@suse.de
GPG Key fingerprint = 0196 BAD8 1CE9 1970 F4BE  1748 E4D4 88E3 0EEA B9D7
"And now for something completely different."

Re: e

[Jean-Christophe Helary]

> On Oct 29, 2015, at 19:09, Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de> wrote:
> 
> Jean-Christophe Helary <jean.christophe.helary@gmail.com> writes:
> 
>> I was under the impression that e evaluated to 2.71828 or something in Emacs.
> 
> It's called float-e.

yes, but I was doing tests in ielm and I'm pretty sure I did not type float-e. It was clearly e, and after seeing e evaluated, I tried pi (which worked then and works still).

Jean-Christophe 

Re: e

[Random832]

Jean-Christophe Helary <jean.christophe.helary@gmail.com> writes:
> yes, but I was doing tests in ielm and I'm pretty sure I did not type
> float-e. It was clearly e, and after seeing e evaluated, I tried pi
> (which worked then and works still).

(describe-variable 'pi) says it's "Obsolete since Emacs-23.3".

The actual removal of e is here:
http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git/commit?id=993687
And it was marked obsolete here:
http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git/commit?id=9e0d4f

But you can see from the comments that the writing was always in the
wall, since here:
http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git/commit?id=9a0fc3
>+;; It's too inconvenient to make `e' a constant because it's used as
>+;; a temporary variable all the time.

Re: e

[Jean-Christophe Helary]

Thank you for the references (Drew too).

Since al this happened in the same day I guess I changed of version without realizing it (like the OSX standard version and then the brew version).

Jean-Christophe 

> On Oct 29, 2015, at 22:58, Random832 <random832@fastmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Jean-Christophe Helary <jean.christophe.helary@gmail.com> writes:
>> yes, but I was doing tests in ielm and I'm pretty sure I did not type
>> float-e. It was clearly e, and after seeing e evaluated, I tried pi
>> (which worked then and works still).
> 
> (describe-variable 'pi) says it's "Obsolete since Emacs-23.3".
> 
> The actual removal of e is here:
> http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git/commit?id=993687
> And it was marked obsolete here:
> http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git/commit?id=9e0d4f
> 
> But you can see from the comments that the writing was always in the
> wall, since here:
> http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git/commit?id=9a0fc3
>> +;; It's too inconvenient to make `e' a constant because it's used as
>> +;; a temporary variable all the time.
> 
> 

Re: e

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

Jean-Christophe Helary writes:

 > Since al this happened in the same day I guess I changed of version
 > without realizing it (like the OSX standard version and then the
 > brew version).

My Yosemite system provides 22.1.1, which is kinda ancient (copyright
2007!)

Re: e

[Random832]

"Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen@xemacs.org> writes:

> Jean-Christophe Helary writes:
>
>  > Since al this happened in the same day I guess I changed of version
>  > without realizing it (like the OSX standard version and then the
>  > brew version).
>
> My Yosemite system provides 22.1.1, which is kinda ancient (copyright
> 2007!)

Same post-El-Capitan. I think Apple just doesn't care. Their vim is a
bit more recent, dated 2010. Their bash is 3.2.57, likewise dated 2007,
though it is at least patched for shellshock.

Re: e

[Jean-Christophe Helary]

> On Oct 31, 2015, at 14:32, Stephen J. Turnbull <stephen@xemacs.org> wrote:
> 
> Jean-Christophe Helary writes:
> 
>> Since al this happened in the same day I guess I changed of version
>> without realizing it (like the OSX standard version and then the
>> brew version).
> 
> My Yosemite system provides 22.1.1, which is kinda ancient (copyright
> 2007!)

I just checked and /usr/bin/emacs --version gives 22.1.1 too.
So it must have been that.

Jean-Christophe 

Re: e

[Xue Fuqiao]

On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 1:32 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull <stephen@xemacs.org> wrote:
> Jean-Christophe Helary writes:
>
>  > Since al this happened in the same day I guess I changed of version
>  > without realizing it (like the OSX standard version and then the
>  > brew version).
>
> My Yosemite system provides 22.1.1, which is kinda ancient (copyright
> 2007!)

Yes.  I guess Apple doesn't like GPLv3 (which is release on 29 June 2007):

localhost:bin xfq$ bash --version
GNU bash, version 3.2.57(1)-release (x86_64-apple-darwin15)
Copyright (C) 2007 Free Software Foundation, Inc.

localhost:bin xfq$ ./emacs --version
GNU Emacs 22.1.1
Copyright (C) 2007 Free Software Foundation, Inc.

localhost:bin xfq$ ./rsync --version
rsync  version 2.6.9  protocol version 29
Copyright (C) 1996-2006 by Andrew Tridgell, Wayne Davison, and others.
<http://rsync.samba.org/>

localhost:bin xfq$ ./screen --version
Screen version 4.00.03 (FAU) 23-Oct-06

localhost:bin xfq$ ./makeinfo --version
makeinfo (GNU texinfo) 4.8

localhost:bin xfq$ ./groff --version
GNU groff version 1.19.2
Copyright (C) 2004 Free Software Foundation, Inc.

localhost:bin xfq$ ./diff --version
diff (GNU diffutils) 2.8.1
Copyright (C) 2002 Free Software Foundation, Inc.

localhost:bin xfq$ ./patch --version
patch 2.5.8
Copyright (C) 1988 Larry Wall
Copyright (C) 2002 Free Software Foundation, Inc.

Although GNU nano seems to be an exception (it's the only exception I found):

localhost:bin xfq$ ./nano --version
 GNU nano version 2.0.6 (compiled 15:38:45, Aug 22 2015)
 Email: nano@nano-editor.org Web: http://www.nano-editor.org/
 Compiled options: --disable-nls --enable-color --enable-extra
--enable-multibuffer --enable-nanorc --enable-utf8

Maybe Apple has (had?) plans for patent lawsuits or TiVoization.  I
don't know.

Re: e

[Random832]

Xue Fuqiao <xfq.free@gmail.com> writes:
> Although GNU nano seems to be an exception (it's the only exception I
> found):
> localhost:bin xfq$ ./nano --version
>  GNU nano version 2.0.6 (compiled 15:38:45, Aug 22 2015)

That's a build timestamp. Nano 2.0.6 was released 2007.04.26, and was
the last pre-GPLv3 one. http://www.nano-editor.org/dist/v2.2/NEWS

> Maybe Apple has (had?) plans for patent lawsuits or TiVoization.  I
> don't know.

Well, how much does the GPLv3 prevent "unrelated" patent lawsuits? Maybe
they were concerned it might affect their design patent lawsuits vs
Samsung etc.

Maybe it just wasn't worth the budget to have the lawyers look at how it
affects them when few of their users care about having the latest and
greatest command-line stuff.

RE: e

[Drew Adams]

> >> I was under the impression that e evaluated to 2.71828 or something in
> >> Emacs.
> >
> > It's called float-e.
> 
> yes, but I was doing tests in ielm and I'm pretty sure I did not type float-
> e. It was clearly e, and after seeing e evaluated, I tried pi (which worked
> then and works still).

Your memory is correct.  This was changed in Emacs 24.  In Emacs 23 and prior,
`e' is a predefined "constant".  This is now called `float-e'.