Re: lisp-interaction-mode binding RET

[Peter Seibel <peter@javamonkey.com>]

Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:

> Can you suggest another key binding to use for last-sexp-toggle-display
> instead of RET?

Dunno. Something I'm not already trying to use for something else like
entering new lines. ;-) I'm not sure I understand the binding for
last-sexp-toggle-display fits into things--it doesn't *seem* to be
part of the major mode (i.e. it's not listed as a binding when I type
C-h m) so I'm not sure what conventions it's supposed to be following.
Maybe ESC RET on the pattern of ESC TAB which the major mode already
uses?

Anyway, I noticed this problem because I was trying to use RET to
enter a new line in the middle of a longish list (like the value of
load-path) that I had just dumped into my *scratch* buffer to see what
the heck it was and was pretty confused at what the heck was going on
since the binding didn't show up in the mode documentation (nor, as it
turns out, in the output of describe-bindings) I eventually figured
out from experiments with C-h k more or less what was going on.

>       (make-list 20 'a)
>       (a a a a a a a a a a a a ...)
> 
>     Now if I put my cursor on the opening parentheses of the list of a's
>     and hit return I get an error:
> 
>       Wrong type argument: integer-or-marker-p, nil
> 
> That bug seems to have been fixed in the latest sources in CVS.

Cool.

>       (make-list 20 'a)
>       Type a bunch of stuff here(a a a a a a a a a a a a ...)
> 
> 
>     Then when I hit RET, l-s-t-d expands the list and wipes out everything
>     back to the original list leaving me with this:
> 
>       (make-list 20 'a)
>       (a a a a a a a a a a a a ...)(a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a)
> 
> That also seems to have been fixed.

Likewise, cool.

>     This is all with GNU Emacs 21.3.1 running on Linux.
> 
> Linux alone is not a sufficient platform to run Emacs.  You need the
> whole GNU/Linux system.
>
> We worked for many years to develope the GNU system before Linux was
> even thought of.  If you call the whole system "Linux", you're giving
> its principal developers none of the credit.  Would you please call it
> "GNU/Linux"?

My mistake. Thanks for all your hard work.

-Peter

-- 
Peter Seibel                                      peter@javamonkey.com

         Lisp is the red pill. -- John Fraser, comp.lang.lisp