emacs-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Severe regressions in context of keyboard macros


From: Eli Zaretskii
Subject: Re: Severe regressions in context of keyboard macros
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2019 15:12:36 +0300

> Cc: address@hidden
> From: Christoph Arenz <address@hidden>
> Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2019 19:42:56 +0200
> 
> On 28.09.19 11:46, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> >> I spent some more time on this. The problem is bigger than stated in the
> >> original bug report:
> >> Any function key that follows a digit and is not separated by a <spc> or
> >> <return> is recorded twice in calc when defining a keyboard macro, e.g.
> >> `1 <return> <f3> 2 + <f4>' records "2++".
> > Is this while using Calc, or is this in some other situation?
> Just in Calc. I should have been a bit clearer what I meant with
> `function' key:
> While calc is reading digits, it recognizes it has rad a complete number
> when reading <spc> or <return>.
> 
> Calc also recognizes a number when reading a calc function key when
> reading digits. This is one path when calc reads this key a second time.
> 
> 
> Here is lossage for such a case:
>   1             ;; calcDigit-start
>   <return>      ;; calcDigit-nondigit
>   1             ;; calcDigit-start
>   2             ;; calcDigit-key
>   +             ;; calcDigit-key
>   +             ;; calc-plus
> 
> 
> Note the `+' being read twice. With the proposed patch, lossage looks
> just the same -- just in case of keyboard macro recording, we avoid the
> `+' being recorded twice. Lossage in this case looks like this:
>   <f3>         ;; kmacro-start-macro-or-insert-counter
>   1            ;; calcDigit-start
>   <return>     ;; calcDigit-nondigit
>   1            ;; calcDigit-start
>   2            ;; calcDigit-key
>   +            ;; calcDigit-key
>   ;; calc-plus
>   <f4>         ;; kmacro-end-or-call-macro
> >> I am getting more confident that the patch below fixes this bug.Itfixes
> >> a severe issue with macros in calc, does not make things worse and does
> >> not interfere in case no macro is being defined.
> >>
> >> Your thoughts?
> > If it works well for you in Calc, I will install it.
> >
> > Thanks.
> Yes, the patch definitely improves the situation. Thanks!

Thanks, I've finally installed your fix in Calc, it will be in the
next Emacs release.  Sorry for the long delay.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]