F... F... Uh.

F... F... Uh.

[Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 857 bytes --]

Ok, so I'm trying not to use naughty words.

A user has sent me this backtrace from Emacs 20.2.89:

Signaling: (error "Invalid character: 4200, 4831827856, 0x0")
  insert("  €0    : ")
  (progn (insert (format "%c%c%c%s%5s: " gnus-tmp-marked-mark gnus-tmp-subscribed gnus-tmp-process-marked gnus-group-indentation gnus-tmp-number-of-unread)) (gnus-put-text-property (point) (progn ... ...) gnus-mouse-face-prop gnus-mouse-face) (insert gnus-tmp-grouplens "\n"))

[...]

  gnus-group-insert-group-line("dummy.group" 0 nil 0 nil)

What is happening here is that Gnus is trying to insert \200 into a
buffer, and Emacs (no longer) will let it.  What is now the proper
incantation?

It now does something like

(insert 128)

Is 

(insert ?\200) 

allowed?

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
  larsi@ifi.uio.no * Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen

Re: F... F... Uh.

[SL Baur]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset=X-CTEXT, Size: 941 bytes --]

Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@ifi.uio.no> writes:

> Ok, so I'm trying not to use naughty words.
> A user has sent me this backtrace from Emacs 20.2.89:

Hmmm, that sounds like an unreleased version.  Can I presume this has
been pointed out to Richard and he has indicated it is a new feature
and not a bug?  Unreleased versions of emacs, like alpha versions of
Gnus, are supposed to have bugs (much as we would like it to be
otherwise).

> Signaling: (error "Invalid character: 4200, 4831827856, 0x0")
>   insert("  €0    : ")

 ...

> What is happening here is that Gnus is trying to insert \200 into a
> buffer, and Emacs (no longer) will let it.  What is now the proper
> incantation?

> It now does something like

> (insert 128)

That's kind of naughty.

> Is 

> (insert ?\200) 

That would be better.  One is going to come to grief sooner or later
being too cavalier about mixing characters and integers in XEmacs 20.

> allowed?

Re: F... F... Uh.

[Lars Balker Rasmussen]

SL Baur <steve@xemacs.org> writes:
> Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@ifi.uio.no> writes:
> > A user has sent me this backtrace from Emacs 20.2.89:
> 
> Hmmm, that sounds like an unreleased version.  

Or the 89th build of Emacs 20.2?

> > It now does something like
> 
> > (insert 128)
> 
> That's kind of naughty.

Yes, well, I have a lot of problems with the functions in iso-insert
from Emacs 20.2, when trying to use a Mule'd emacs.  Try 

	M-: (insert 248 248 248) RET C-a C-d 

in a bare emacs-20 for laughs.
-- 
Lars Balker Rasmussen, Software Engineer, Mjolner Informatics ApS
lbr@mjolner.dk

Re: F... F... Uh.

[William M. Perry]

SL Baur <steve@xemacs.org> writes:

> Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@ifi.uio.no> writes:
> 
> > Ok, so I'm trying not to use naughty words.
> > A user has sent me this backtrace from Emacs 20.2.89:
> 
> Hmmm, that sounds like an unreleased version.  Can I presume this has
> been pointed out to Richard and he has indicated it is a new feature
> and not a bug?  Unreleased versions of emacs, like alpha versions of
> Gnus, are supposed to have bugs (much as we would like it to be
> otherwise).

  This is known lossage with Emacs 20 - welcome to hell lars!  Its not just 
that you are inserting it without ?\200, but just that its a weird iso char 
and you haven't done all the funky make-char crap on it.  Even then, you
can still run into this grief.  can you say, condition-case or special
lookup table? :)

-Bill P.

Re: F... F... Uh.

[Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen]

Lars Balker Rasmussen <lbr@mjolner.dk> writes:

> > > A user has sent me this backtrace from Emacs 20.2.89:
> > 
> > Hmmm, that sounds like an unreleased version.  
> 
> Or the 89th build of Emacs 20.2?

No, it was actually Emacs 20.2.89.1.  

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
  larsi@gnus.org * Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen

Re: F... F... Uh.

[Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen]

SL Baur <steve@xemacs.org> writes:

> Hmmm, that sounds like an unreleased version.  Can I presume this has
> been pointed out to Richard and he has indicated it is a new feature
> and not a bug?

Nope.

> Unreleased versions of emacs, like alpha versions of
> Gnus, are supposed to have bugs (much as we would like it to be
> otherwise).

That's true.  I think I'll just let this one ride until Emacs 20.3 is
released and see whether it still is a problem there.

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
  larsi@gnus.org * Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen