Aaron Ecay writes:
> Ok. Then:
> 1. The indentation is wrong, because (calc-pop 1) is the second argument
>to calc-eval.
> 2. The prog1 form is not needed, because it only wraps a single form
>(the calc-eval call).
>
> This looks wrong to me, so please double-check.
Ah, I misunderstood.
2015ko azaroak 4an, Jan Malakhovski-ek idatzi zuen:
>
> Aaron Ecay writes:
>
>> Are you missing a close paren at the end of the above line?
>
> It evaluates and works ok, so I think it's ok.
Ok. Then:
1. The indentation is wrong, because (calc-pop 1) is the second argument
to calc-eval.
2.
Aaron Ecay writes:
> Are you missing a close paren at the end of the above line?
It evaluates and works ok, so I think it's ok.
> Also, shouldn’t calc-eval take a string as an argument, not a lisp
> form? (I’m asking based on the docstring, I don’t know the calc API at
> all).
1) It was like t
Hi Jan,
2015ko azaroak 3an, Jan Malakhovski-ek idatzi zuen:
>
> * lisp/ob-calc.el (org-babel-calc-eval-string): Clean up the stack after
> expression
> evaluation.
> ---
> lisp/ob-calc.el | 4 +++-
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/lisp/ob-calc.el b/lisp/ob-ca
* lisp/ob-calc.el (org-babel-calc-eval-string): Clean up the stack after
expression
evaluation.
---
lisp/ob-calc.el | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/lisp/ob-calc.el b/lisp/ob-calc.el
index e8b43e7..2656f27 100644
--- a/lisp/ob-calc.el
+++ b/lisp/ob-calc.el
