bug#5852: 23.1; Incorrect references in ses-mode

[Vincent Belaïche]

Just to say that I did the test manually on my home PC a couple of
time, and I could not reproduce the problem.
That is quite annoying, yesterday I reproduced it on my office PC once.
  V.

Le dim. 25 juil. 2021 à 08:32, Vincent Belaïche
<vincent.belaiche@gmail.com> a écrit :
>
> By doing the test manually on my home PC I found some interesting
> difference. After
>
> 2 RET
>
> on my home PC the cursor goes to the end of buffer narrowed region,
> while on my office PC it goes to B2. This means that the TAB that
> follows won't the same effect. On my home PC it creates a 3rd row,
> while on my office PC it creates the 3rd column.
> I found the reason why so : my home PC had some customization for the
> ses-after-entry-functions. After erasing customization I had the same
> behaviour …
> Anyway, that does not affect the bug-5852 test function as it only
> uses ses-jump for motion.
>   V.
>
> Le dim. 25 juil. 2021 à 08:18, Vincent Belaïche
> <vincent.belaiche@gmail.com> a écrit :
> >
> > The bug-5852 test function does not reproduce the bug on my home PC either …
> >   V.
> >
> > Le dim. 25 juil. 2021 à 08:17, Vincent Belaïche
> > <vincent.belaiche@gmail.com> a écrit :
> > >
> > > The same test function, but with comments :
> > >
> > >
> > > (defun bug-5852 ();;---
> > >   "Check no irrelevant reference is created when a row is inserted and
> > > a formula is yanked"
> > >   (interactive);;---
> > >   (let ((ses-initial-size '(3 . 3))); size before last row insertion,
> > > due to all preceding TAB & C-o
> > >   (with-temp-buffer
> > >     (ses-mode)
> > >     (dolist (val '(
> > >                    (ses-edit-cell 0 1 1) ; 1 RET
> > >                    (ses-edit-cell 1 0 2) ; 2 RET
> > >                    (ses-edit-cell 1 1 (+ B1 A2)) ; ( + SPC B1 SPC A2 RET
> > >                    (ses-edit-cell 2 0 3) ; 3 RET
> > >                    (ses-edit-cell 2 1 (+ B2 A3)) ; ( + SPC B2 SPC A3 RET
> > >                    (ses-jump A3) ; C-n
> > >                    (ses-insert-row 1) ; C-o
> > >                    (ses-edit-cell 2 0 4) ; 4 RET
> > >                    (ses-jump B2) ; C-p
> > >                    ))
> > >       (apply 'funcall-interactively  val)
> > >       (ses-command-hook))
> > >   (let ((beg (point-marker))); C-SPC
> > >     (ses-jump 'C2) ; C-f
> > >     (copy-region-as-kill beg (point) nil); M-w
> > >     (set-marker beg nil))
> > >   (dolist (val '(
> > >                  (ses-jump B3); C-n C-b
> > >                  (yank) ; C-y
> > >                  (ses-jump B4); C-n
> > >                  (yank); C-y
> > >                  ))
> > >     (apply 'funcall-interactively  val)
> > >     (ses-command-hook))
> > >   (ses-repair-cell-reference-all)
> > >   )))
> > >
> > > Le dim. 25 juil. 2021 à 07:56, Vincent Belaïche
> > > <vincent.belaiche@gmail.com> a écrit :
> > > >
> > > > On more significant difference between the function bug-5852 and the
> > > > example is the the initial size is (3 . 3) instead of (1. 1). This is
> > > > because I speculated that only the last row insertion (C-o) plays a
> > > > role.
> > > >
> > > >   V.
> > > >
> > > > Le dim. 25 juil. 2021 à 07:48, Vincent Belaïche
> > > > <vincent.belaiche@gmail.com> a écrit :
> > > > >
> > > > > Just to add something : reading again SES code, and (info "(elisp)
> > > > > Command Overview") I am a bit skeptical about the explanation in my
> > > > > previous email.
> > > > > It seems that only key strokes are queue, but command execution and
> > > > > post command hook are in sequence, so not done concurrently.
> > > > > I wrote this function to try to reproduce the bug, and on my office PC
> > > > > it does not reproduce it:
> > > > >
> > > > > (defun bug-5852 ();;---
> > > > >   "Check no irrelevant reference is created when a row is inserted and
> > > > > a formula is yanked"
> > > > >   (interactive);;---
> > > > >   (let ((ses-initial-size '(3 . 3)))
> > > > >   (with-temp-buffer
> > > > >     (ses-mode)
> > > > >     (dolist (val '(
> > > > >                    (ses-edit-cell 0 1 1)
> > > > >                    (ses-edit-cell 1 0 2)
> > > > >                    (ses-edit-cell 1 1 (+ B1 A2))
> > > > >                    (ses-edit-cell 2 0 3)
> > > > >                    (ses-edit-cell 2 1 (+ B2 A3))
> > > > >                    (ses-jump A3)
> > > > >                    (ses-insert-row 1)
> > > > >                    (ses-edit-cell 2 0 4)
> > > > >                    (ses-jump B2)
> > > > >                    ))
> > > > >       (apply 'funcall-interactively  val)
> > > > >       (ses-command-hook))
> > > > >     (let ((beg (point-marker)))
> > > > >       (ses-jump 'C2) ; C-n
> > > > >       (copy-region-as-kill beg (point) nil)
> > > > >       (set-marker beg nil))
> > > > >     (dolist (val '(
> > > > >                    (ses-jump B3)
> > > > >                    (yank)
> > > > >                    (ses-jump B4)
> > > > >                    (yank)
> > > > >                    ))
> > > > >       (apply 'funcall-interactively  val)
> > > > >       (ses-command-hook))
> > > > >     (ses-repair-cell-reference-all)
> > > > >     )))
> > > > >
> > > > > Please note that the main difference with the provided example is that
> > > > > motion is done with ses-jump, and not with motion commands. Also the
> > > > > save to keyring is not done interatively.
> > > > >    V.
> > > > >
> > > > > Le sam. 24 juil. 2021 à 23:46, Vincent Belaïche
> > > > > <vincent.belaiche@gmail.com> a écrit :
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hello Lars,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Sorry for not making any feedback for so long, actually I was just
> > > > > > distracted by some other business, and I somewhat had forgotten 
> > > > > > about
> > > > > > it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I suspect a race condition between the post command hook and the 
> > > > > > next
> > > > > > command. That is to say when one yanks the fomula (the first yank),
> > > > > > one relocates the reference but for this one uses current references
> > > > > > that have not yet been relocated because the previous post-command
> > > > > > hook execution is not yet over.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The bug does not show every time I do the experiment. I tried this
> > > > > > morning with my office PC which is a fast machine, and it proved out
> > > > > > quite hard to reproduce, even when I launched some big C program
> > > > > > compilation in parallel to eat the mips.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Next week I will do some experiment with my home PC which is quite
> > > > > > quite slower, and I make some feedback. Unfortunateless both machine
> > > > > > do not have the same emacs version, but anyway all changes in SES
> > > > > > since the version on my home PC are not related to this bug, so
> > > > > > nevertheless that will be a good indication whether my guess is
> > > > > > correct.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >   V.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Le dim. 18 juil. 2021 à 15:37, Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> a 
> > > > > > écrit :
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Vincent Belaïche <vincentbelaiche@orange.fr> writes:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I will investigate why and feed back once I have a better idea 
> > > > > > > > of what
> > > > > > > > is happening.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > this was a year ago.  Did you make any progress on this issue?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
> > > > > > >    bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no