RE: Do the new M-. changes work with CLISP?

From: Bob Rogers on Thursday, May 08, 2003 6:24 PM
[snip]
> Yes, and it appears that you have been bitten by a bug in the 
> backward-
> compatibility code for "unenhanced" Lisps, which I seem to have
> neglected to keep working.  The right thing to do would be for me to
> download CLISP, fix this bug, then keep going until the new M-. also
> works with CLISP.  Unfortunately, I'm in the middle of a long and
> painful upgrade job, and haven't even started to worry about 
> bringing up
> Lisps under the new system, so I'm not sure when I'll be able 
> to get to
> this.  In the mean time, the following patch to current CVS ought to
> allow M-. to limp along under CLISP.  I haven't committed it because I
> have no way to test it; if you (or anyone else) find that it works,
> please go ahead and do so.

Bob,

Thanks for the quick patch. I applied it but (unfortunately) I got the 
same results (after applying the patch, recompiling ilisp-src.el, exiting
emacs, restarting emacs & restarting ilisp):

Debugger entered--Lisp error: (error "shouldn't have been given type \"any\", for (nil nil \"test\").")
  signal(error ("shouldn't have been given type \"any\", for (nil nil \"test\")."))
  error("shouldn't have been given type %S, for %S." "any" (nil nil "test"))
  lisp-locate-clisp((nil nil "test") "any" t nil)
  lisp-locate-definition-in-file(lisp-locate-clisp [cl-struct-ilisp-defn-spec (nil nil "test") "test" "any" "c:/usr/home/lisp/Projects/test.lisp" nil nil] t)
  lisp-next-definition(nil t)
  next-definition-lisp(nil t)
  lisp-edit-definitions-normal(("COMMON-LISP-USER" "::" "test") "any" nil nil)
  edit-definitions-lisp(("COMMON-LISP-USER" "::" "test") "any")
* call-interactively(edit-definitions-lisp)

I instrumented the lisp-parse-and-cache-source-definitions function but
get an edebug break in that function. I then put a message statement right
at the start of the function but didn't get any message in the minibuffer
or the message buffer. Since your patch was applied to that particular 
function, maybe that function is not being called for an "unenhanced" lisp
and; therefore, your patch isn't doing anything?

Thanks for your help with this.

--
Bill Clementson



-------------------------------------------------------
Enterprise Linux Forum Conference & Expo, June 4-6, 2003, Santa Clara
The only event dedicated to issues related to Linux enterprise solutions
www.enterpriselinuxforum.com