[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: xdvipdfmx fails with some regtests (“Invalid object”)
From: |
David Kastrup |
Subject: |
Re: xdvipdfmx fails with some regtests (“Invalid object”) |
Date: |
Fri, 19 Jun 2020 15:13:33 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
Han-Wen Nienhuys <hanwenn@gmail.com> writes:
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 12:50 PM Jonas Hahnfeld <hahnjo@hahnjo.de> wrote:
>> No changes for me. Please also keep in mind that the same command
>> string works via the API interpreter. It could be that this is related
>> to processing other files before the "empty" one...
>> I'll try to write a small wrapper around the API so we can test outside
>> of LilyPond what actually triggers the broken PDF.
>
> Your hunch is correct. No need to write a wrapper, the following in a
> .ly file works if you replace SCM_UNDEFINED with SCM_UNSPECIFIED in
> ly:gs-api
return SCM_UNDEFINED; is _NOT_ good behavior for Scheme functions. I
have no idea why it is done here. SCM_UNDEFINED is a special value for
the C API layer. It is used internally for indicating non-existent data
members, or the end of variable-length argument lists. Returning it to
the _Scheme_ layer should never be done.
For functions not returning a specific value, return SCM_UNSPECIFIED; is
the right course.
--
David Kastrup
- Re: xdvipdfmx fails with some regtests (“Invalid object”), (continued)
- Re: xdvipdfmx fails with some regtests (“Invalid object”), Jonas Hahnfeld, 2020/06/19
- Re: xdvipdfmx fails with some regtests (“Invalid object”), Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2020/06/19
- Re: xdvipdfmx fails with some regtests (“Invalid object”), Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2020/06/19
- Re: xdvipdfmx fails with some regtests (“Invalid object”), Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2020/06/19
- Re: xdvipdfmx fails with some regtests (“Invalid object”), Jonas Hahnfeld, 2020/06/19
- Re: xdvipdfmx fails with some regtests (“Invalid object”), Jonas Hahnfeld, 2020/06/19
- Re: xdvipdfmx fails with some regtests (“Invalid object”), Jonas Hahnfeld, 2020/06/19
- Re: xdvipdfmx fails with some regtests (“Invalid object”), Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2020/06/19
- Re: xdvipdfmx fails with some regtests (“Invalid object”), Jonas Hahnfeld, 2020/06/19
- Re: xdvipdfmx fails with some regtests (“Invalid object”), Michael Käppler, 2020/06/20
- Re: xdvipdfmx fails with some regtests (“Invalid object”),
David Kastrup <=
- Re: xdvipdfmx fails with some regtests (“Invalid object”), Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2020/06/19
- Re: xdvipdfmx fails with some regtests (“Invalid object”), David Kastrup, 2020/06/19
- Re: xdvipdfmx fails with some regtests (“Invalid object”), Jonas Hahnfeld, 2020/06/18
- Re: xdvipdfmx fails with some regtests (“Invalid object”), Jonas Hahnfeld, 2020/06/18