Irrelevant/misleading error message (due to bad syntax in init-file)

Irrelevant/misleading error message (due to bad syntax in init-file)

[Alain.Cochard]

Hello.  

I do the following.

The file ~/.emacs.debug contains:

  (add-to-list 'load-path "/home/cochard/Org/Coch-git/org-mode/lisp")
  (setq org-agenda-files '"/tmp/bug-agenda.org") ; <- bad syntax!
  (find-file "/tmp/bug-agenda2.org") ; <- empty file

The file /tmp/bug-agenda.org contains:

   * Foo :bar:

I run:

   emacs -debug-init -Q -l ~/.emacs.debug

NB: there is no message caused by "-debug-init" related to the bad
syntax in the setq instruction.

When in the empty "bug-agenda2.org", if I do "M-x org-agenda m" I, get
(temporarily) in the minibuffer:

   Use M-x make-directory RET RET to create the directory and its
   parents

In the minibuffer, if I type "<TAB>" or "b<TAB>" or "ba<TAB>" or
"bar"<TAB>, I get "[No match]".  If after either of these 4 "<TAB>" I
hit the "<Return>" key, I get:

   Non-existent agenda file ~/org/* Foo :bar:.  [R]emove from list or
   [A]bort?

NB: I don't have an "~/org" file or directory.

I have:

   Emacs : GNU Emacs 24.5.1 (x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu, GTK+ Version
   3.18.9) of 2016-04-11 on buildvm-25.phx2.fedoraproject.org Package:
   Org mode version 9.1.13 (release_9.1.13-755-gc46fcd @
   /home/cochard/Org/Coch-git/org-mode/lisp/)

I apologize if this issue is too minor (or otherwise inappropriate) to
be reported -- please let me know if so.

Regards


-- 
EOST (École et Observatoire des Sciences de la Terre) 
IPG (Institut de Physique du Globe) | alain.cochard@unistra.fr
5 rue René Descartes   [bureau 106] | Phone: +33 (0)3 68 85 50 44 
F-67084 Strasbourg Cedex, France    | Fax:   +33 (0)3 68 85 01 25     

Re: Irrelevant/misleading error message (due to bad syntax in init-file)

[Nick Dokos]

Alain.Cochard@unistra.fr writes:

>   ...
>   (setq org-agenda-files '"/tmp/bug-agenda.org") ; <- bad syntax!
> ...
> NB: there is no message caused by "-debug-init" related to the bad
> syntax in the setq instruction.
>

That's because it's legal: it's not bad syntax:

'"foo" is equivalent to (quote "foo"). Now `quote' inhibits
evaluation but since strings evaluate to themselves, it does
not matter whether you evaluate or not.

-- 
Nick

"There are only two hard problems in computer science: cache
invalidation, naming things, and off-by-one errors." -Martin Fowler