GNU bug report logs - #66656
Bug reports

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 66656 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 66656 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Lewis Creary <lewcreary <at> cs.com>
To: "bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org" <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>
Subject: Bug reports
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2023 21:42:25 +0000 (UTC)

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

I'm reporting a bug in Gnu emacs lisp, but I'm also reporting a bug in theprocess of reporting emacs lisp bugs.  This first bug consists in the factthat, in bug reports sent using M-x report-emacs-bug, my email address (lewcreary <at> cs.com, in the "from:" field of the email), would have been mangled into a somewhat similar, but different, address in the process of submitting the report.  As a result, any acknowledgment email intended for me (but sent to the mangled address) would not reach me, but wouldinstead generate a "no such person" mailing error.
The main bug I'm reporting consists in the fact that recently, when I triedto test the lisp function displayed just below, I triggered the lisp errormessage "`let' bindings can have only one value-form", when it is clear from inspection of the let* form in question that no such bug exists.  The let* form in question does have just one value-form, the lisp variable   eight-powr-sum..
(defun octal-to-dec (n)  (let* ((oct-str {number-to-string n)         (octal-digits (string-to-reverse-numlist oct-str))         (oct-digit nil)         (eight-powr-term-val 0)         (eight-powr-sum 0)         (indx 0)         (while-nil-val (while (<= indx (length octal-digits))            (setq oct-digit (nth indx octal-digits)                 eight-powr-term-val (* oct-digit (expt 8 indx))                 eight-powr-sum (+ eight-powr-sum eight-powr-term-val)                 indx (1+ index) ))) ) ; end of let-variables     eight-powr-sum )))
Subject: 29.1; "lisp error when there is no error"
In GNU Emacs 29.1 (build 2, x86_64-w64-mingw32) of 2023-08-02 built on AVALONWindowing system distributor 'Microsoft Corp.', version 10.0.22621System Description: Microsoft Windows 10 Home (v10.0.2009.22621.2428)
Configured using: 'configure --with-modules --without-dbus --with-native-compilation=aot --without-compress-install --with-tree-sitter CFLAGS=-O2'
Configured features:ACL GIF GMP GNUTLS HARFBUZZ JPEG JSON LCMS2 LIBXML2 MODULES NATIVE_COMPNOTIFY W32NOTIFY PDUMPER PNG RSVG SOUND SQLITE3 THREADS TIFFTOOLKIT_SCROLL_BARS TREE_SITTER WEBP XPM ZLIB
(NATIVE_COMP present but libgccjit not available)
Important settings:  value of $LANG: ENU  locale-coding-system: cp1252
Major mode: ELisp/d

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Message #8 received at 66656 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman <at> gmx.net>
To: Lewis Creary via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of
 text editors" <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 66656 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Lewis Creary <lewcreary <at> cs.com>
Subject: Re: bug#66656: Bug reports
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2023 00:06:55 +0200

On Fri, 20 Oct 2023 21:42:25 +0000 (UTC) Lewis Creary via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org> wrote:

[...]
> The main bug I'm reporting consists in the fact that recently, when I
> tried to test the lisp function displayed just below, I triggered the
> lisp error message "`let' bindings can have only one value-form", when
> it is clear from inspection of the let* form in question that no such
> bug exists.  The let* form in question does have just one value-form,
> the lisp variable eight-powr-sum..
>
> (defun octal-to-dec (n)
>   (let* ((oct-str {number-to-string n)
>          (octal-digits (string-to-reverse-numlist oct-str))
>          (oct-digit nil)
>          (eight-powr-term-val 0)
>          (eight-powr-sum 0)
>          (indx 0)
>          (while-nil-val (while (<= indx (length octal-digits))
>            (setq oct-digit (nth indx octal-digits)
>                  eight-powr-term-val (* oct-digit (expt 8 indx))
>                  eight-powr-sum (+ eight-powr-sum eight-powr-term-val)
>                  indx (1+ index) ))) ) ; end of let-variables
>      eight-powr-sum )))

The error is because the first let-binding binds `oct-str' to both
`{number-to-string' and `n'.  I guess `{' is a typo for `(' and there
should also be a closing `)': `(oct-str (number-to-string n))'.

Steve Berman

Message #14 received at 66656 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Lewis Creary <lewcreary <at> cs.com>
Cc: 66656 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#66656: Bug reports
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2023 10:27:04 +0300

> Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2023 21:42:25 +0000 (UTC)
> From:  Lewis Creary via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs,
>  the Swiss army knife of text editors" <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>
> 
> I'm reporting a bug in Gnu emacs lisp, but I'm also reporting a bug in the
> process of reporting emacs lisp bugs.  This first bug consists in the fact
> that, in bug reports sent using M-x report-emacs-bug, my email address (lewcreary <at> cs.com, in the
> "from:" field of the email), would have been mangled into a somewhat similar, but different, address
> in the process of submitting the report.  As a result, any acknowledgment email intended for me (but
> sent to the mangled address) would not reach me, but would
> instead generate a "no such person" mailing error.

AFAIK, this should not happen.  In particular, this response email,
where the To: header was produced by my MUA, has your correct
unmangled email address.

> The main bug I'm reporting consists in the fact that recently, when I tried
> to test the lisp function displayed just below, I triggered the lisp error
> message "`let' bindings can have only one value-form", when it is clear from inspection of the let* form
> in question that no such bug exists.  The let* form in question does have just one value-form, the lisp
> variable 
>  eight-powr-sum..

As Steve points out, the first binding includes an error, a typo,
where { was used instead of (.

I see no Emacs bug here.

Message #21 received at 66656-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Stefan Kangas <stefankangas <at> gmail.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 66656-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Lewis Creary <lewcreary <at> cs.com>
Subject: Re: bug#66656: Bug reports
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2023 06:57:05 -0800

Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:

>> Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2023 21:42:25 +0000 (UTC)
>> From:  Lewis Creary via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs,
>>  the Swiss army knife of text editors" <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>
>>
>> I'm reporting a bug in Gnu emacs lisp, but I'm also reporting a bug in the
>> process of reporting emacs lisp bugs.  This first bug consists in the fact
>> that, in bug reports sent using M-x report-emacs-bug, my email address (lewcreary <at> cs.com, in the
>> "from:" field of the email), would have been mangled into a somewhat similar, but different, address
>> in the process of submitting the report.  As a result, any acknowledgment email intended for me (but
>> sent to the mangled address) would not reach me, but would
>> instead generate a "no such person" mailing error.
>
> AFAIK, this should not happen.  In particular, this response email,
> where the To: header was produced by my MUA, has your correct
> unmangled email address.
>
>> The main bug I'm reporting consists in the fact that recently, when I tried
>> to test the lisp function displayed just below, I triggered the lisp error
>> message "`let' bindings can have only one value-form", when it is clear from inspection of the let* form
>> in question that no such bug exists.  The let* form in question does have just one value-form, the lisp
>> variable
>>  eight-powr-sum..
>
> As Steve points out, the first binding includes an error, a typo,
> where { was used instead of (.
>
> I see no Emacs bug here.

I'm therefore closing this bug report.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.