Actually, I found that thread ( https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode/2015-09/msg00390.html) and looked thrugh it (not as good as "looking through" it), but didn't make the connection that it was because of the boolean -- again. What threw me was how this time it seemed to just be a source block execute of the function, whereas before it was the actual code -- as if the problem in ob-scheme.el had escaped and hidden somewhere new.
How does one make an official bug report and/or fix? On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 1:16 PM, Nick Dokos <ndo...@gmail.com> wrote: > Lawrence Bottorff <borg...@gmail.com> writes: > > > I'm using Racket with Geiser and I get this error: > > > > executing Scheme code block... > > => #f > > org-babel-scheme-execute-with-geiser: Invalid read syntax: "#" > > > > when in an org-mode file this code > > > > #+begin_src scheme :exports both :session ch3 > > (define (bool-imply2 x y) > > (or (not x) y)) > > #+end_src > > > > is run (C-c-c) > > > > #+BEGIN_SRC scheme :session ch3 > > (bool-imply2 #t #f) > > #+END_SRC > > > > In the Racket "ch3" REPL session (bool-imply2 #t #f) works fine. I > discovered this problem when I first > > tried a simple export to HTML of the buffer. It seems to not like the > second boolean parameter. So > > switching the parameters then complains about #t . What might be going > on? BTW, does an export try to > > "run" all the code blocks, i.e., why did I find this when I was > exporting to HTML? > > > > LB > > > > Aargh - somebody (maybe you?) had run into this a long time ago and I > had suggested a possible fix, but with the demise of the gmane site, I > cannot find the thread - how do people search the ML nowadays? > > In any case, there is a basic error in ob-scheme.el, line 176 (at > least in the version that I have): > > ... > (setq result (if (or (string= result "#<void>") > (string= result "#<unspecified>")) > nil > (read result))))) ;;;<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< > ... > > The (read result) is bogus: it tries to use the emacs lisp reader to > parse a string that contains a scheme expression. > > IIRC, I suggested changing it to just result: > > ... > (setq result (if (or (string= result "#<void>") > (string= result "#<unspecified>")) > nil > result)))) > ... > > but I didn't (and still don't) know if that breaks anything else. > > Plus I'm on a machine that doesn't have geiser so I can't even test the > basic "fix", > so I hope I've got it right. I'll try to follow up tonight from a machine > that has > geiser installed. > > -- > Nick > > >
