I can confirm that the update resolved the )load crashes I was seeing.
Thank you!
On May 4, 2014 12:07 AM, "Elias Mårtenson" wrote:
> Actually, this one was being debugged last night, with the discussion
> primarily being done off-list.
>
> Please let me know if there are still problems.
>
> Reg
I know this code doesn't make sense but it is part of a function that was
crashing APL. I narrowed it down to the following:
⍎'→0⍴0'
-- Stack trace at Token.cc:665
0x7f503336bde5 __libc_start_main
0x43550d m
)clear
CLEAR WS
∇test
[1] [∆2]
execute_oper() failed at No/bad edit_to at Nabla.cc:621
[1]
Hi Akiva,
yes, please report them.
The fix in SVN 245 should have removed most of them, not only for Drop.
/// Jürgen
On 05/04/2014 04:55 PM, Akiva Avraham wrote:
Tried 245; looks great.
Actually I have run across a few debug messages when trying out
improper monadics. If I run across any m
On 2014-05-04 22:21:48, Elias Mårtenson wrote:
> I was reading the following thread on comp.lang.apl:
> https://groups.google.com/
> d/msg/comp.lang.apl/ZmdHbyqSM4M/522hE9rDRTkJ
>
> In it, it is suggested that the following statement will work:
>
> (3 3⍴⍳9)×⍤1 ⍳3
>
> However, GNU APL give
I was reading the following thread on comp.lang.apl:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.lang.apl/ZmdHbyqSM4M/522hE9rDRTkJ
In it, it is suggested that the following statement will work:
* (3 3⍴⍳9)×⍤1 ⍳3*
However, GNU APL gives RANK ERROR here. Is that correct?
Regards,
Elias
Hi Akiva,
I have removed the extra debug printout, see SVN 245.
Monadic ? is undefined as indicated by 'Error' in your table;
I believe the last element of X is ¯1?X and not ?X.
/// Jürgen
On 05/04/2014 03:20 PM, Akiva Avraham wrote:
Thought I'd point out an inconsistency.
http://i.imgur.co
Thought I'd point out an inconsistency.
http://i.imgur.com/A8Q3Ka7.jpg
TakeA?B Select the first (or last) A elements of B according to
×A Take?B Select first element
DropA?B Remove the first (or last) A elements of B according to
×A Drop?B Error
?::ev
Can you build and test with the latest Emacs 24.4 pretest?
On 4 May 2014 20:35, "Blake McBride" wrote:
> In this case, I did not load any WS. This is a fresh evocation of GNU
> APL. So - newly created. I do see the problem either way, however.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Blake
>
>
>
> On Sun, May 4, 2014
In this case, I did not load any WS. This is a fresh evocation of GNU APL.
So - newly created. I do see the problem either way, however.
Thanks.
Blake
On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 7:33 AM, Elias Mårtenson wrote:
> Does the gg function exist at this time, or is it newly created?
> On 4 May 2014
Does the gg function exist at this time, or is it newly created?
On 4 May 2014 20:31, "Blake McBride" wrote:
> I am using Emacs 24.3.1. It comes with Linux Mint. I did not build it
> myself. I do have a number of customizations in my .emacs file.
>
> Okay, I have deleted everything out of my .
I am using Emacs 24.3.1. It comes with Linux Mint. I did not build it
myself. I do have a number of customizations in my .emacs file.
Okay, I have deleted everything out of my .emacs file except the GNU APL
mode stuff and re-started emacs.
I started gnu-apl in Emacs, All I typed next is the fo
I tried that too. I can't really think of any that could cause this to
happen. Unless, of course there is a problem with your Emacs. What version
are you using? Did you build it yourself?
Regards,
Elias
On 4 May 2014 20:03, "Blake McBride" wrote:
> No, I am typing del-function name.
>
>
> On Sun
No, I am typing del-function name.
On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 2:15 AM, Elias Mårtenson wrote:
> I tried this, but I am not able to reproduce this problem. Are you editing
> the function using C-c C-f?
>
> Regards,
> Elias
>
>
> On 4 May 2014 07:28, Blake McBride wrote:
>
>> Greetings,
>>
>> While
Hi Blake,
before the fix, )LOAD would )CLEAR first, which deletes all functions
including native ones,
which dlclose()s the shared library providing the native function, which
invalidates all callbacks
installed b the shared library.
After the fix, the shared library is not dlclosed() automat
I tried this, but I am not able to reproduce this problem. Are you editing
the function using C-c C-f?
Regards,
Elias
On 4 May 2014 07:28, Blake McBride wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> While using Emacs mode I found the following small bug. If you edit an
> existing function, move the cursor around,
Actually, this one was being debugged last night, with the discussion
primarily being done off-list.
Please let me know if there are still problems.
Regards,
Elias
On 4 May 2014 09:27, David B. Lamkins wrote:
> Ah, I didn't realize I was so far behind. Thanks for the heads-up! :)
>
> On Sun,
17 matches
Mail list logo
