On 20 February 2014 17:24, Kacper Gutowski wrote:
In this function, next is 2 (a label) rather than function you
> defined earlier. So you literally have [3] S←2 S.
Thank you. This explains the problem. Very silly of me.
The crash when saving the resulting workspace should still be a bug thou
Jürgen,
I will put a check for )MORE availability in the end_input function and
display a notification in Emacs when it contains something. Would this be
the right approach?
Regards,
Elias
On 20 February 2014 23:44, Juergen Sauermann
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> the normal 3-line error printout is docume
Gentle people,
In Gnu APL file file_io.cc, lines 597, 617, and 643, `[]' should be
inserted between the `delete' and `del' to match the `new char
[ bytes ... ]' on lines 591, 612, and 636, respectively.
Regards,
Fred
Retired Chemical Engineer
Hi,
the normal 3-line error printout is documented by IBM and shall remain
as is for compatibility.
I will, however, put more information about errors in )MORE such as file
names, strerror() stings and the like.
Pleas feel free to indicate where the information related to errors is
not suf
Hi,
thanks, should work in SVN 136.
/// Jürgen
On 02/20/2014 11:57 AM, Kacper Gutowski wrote:
On 2014-02-16 18:09:06, Juergen Sauermann wrote:
Ad 1) I changed the assertions Symbol.cc to short warnings visible in )MORE.
I wouldn't guess to check )MORE upon getting VALUE ERROR on shared
vari
On 20 Feb 2014 18:57, "Kacper Gutowski" wrote:
>
> On 2014-02-16 18:09:06, Juergen Sauermann wrote:
> > Ad 1) I changed the assertions Symbol.cc to short warnings visible in
)MORE.
>
> I wouldn't guess to check )MORE upon getting VALUE ERROR on shared
> variable, but I guess it's better than faile
On 2014-02-16 18:09:06, Juergen Sauermann wrote:
> Ad 1) I changed the assertions Symbol.cc to short warnings visible in )MORE.
I wouldn't guess to check )MORE upon getting VALUE ERROR on shared
variable, but I guess it's better than failed assertion.
> Ad 3) hopefully fixed.
I've mistakenly put
On 2014-02-20 01:05:16, Elias Mårtenson wrote:
>
> ∇N disploop S
> →(N=0)/0
> next:
> S←next S
> disp ← '.#'[1+S]
> ⎕DL ÷4
> N←N-1
> →next
> ∇
In this function, next is 2 (a label) rather than function you
defined earlier. So you literally have [3] S←2 S.
> B
