Erik Naggum (····@naggum.no) wrote:
: * ········@Bayou.UH.EDU
: | Have a nice day Erik and I certainly hope you manage to dislodge
: | from your posterior whatever it is that is making you so belligerent.
: whatever your feelings may have been at that final point of your article,
: your escalating hostilites are uncalled-for.
My hostilities were directly in response to your smug attitude
and deliberate misrepresentation. You made no attempt to
read my post and then proceeded to deliberately toss around
BS and pin it on me. If you want to know just why I feel
contempt towards you, read the article to which you were
originally responded (this time read it all the way through)
then read your arrogant response. You will see that my actions
were well justified.
: I found your article
: predominantly destructive and I have no use for your destructivism.
I've seen your handiwork on other threads. While I have no doubt
that you are a knowledgable person, you are also belligerent,
arrogant, cocky, smug, abusive and rude. The thread "Superior
Programming Languages" comes to mind, particularly some of
the responses you posted based on the Lisp benchmark.
: your
: repeated complaints about the limitations of recursion in Emacs does not
: mesh with someone who reads manuals, which I infer from your hostile
: ranting that I have insulted you gravely by implying.
Well then you obviously need to work on your logic now don't you?
The first thing I do whenever there's a problem is to read the
manuals. I invoke "describe function" and/or "describe variable/key"
as appropriate and try to search for some likely names and do
some homework from there. Then if need be I pull up the info
pages and start hopping down links and running searches in an
attempt to find what I need. It is only as a last resort that
I ask for help publicly.
From what I read I found that there was a max-lisp-eval-depth
variable as well as a max-sepdcl-? variable. The max-lisp-eval-depth
was described and I knew I could set it, but the max-sepdcl-? was
described as some kind of limit, so naturally I assumed that it
would not behoove me to set it. The organization of the variables
and wording of the document led me to believe this.
While this is in fact a misunderstanding on my part, it did not
warrant the sort of crass attitude you were dealing out in your
previous post.
: I _would_ have had a
: use for suggestions to improve the manual if you found it so lacking, but
: you don't even give any reason for that.
First and foremost, I did not have suggestions for improving anything
simply because at the time I was not sure as to what was going on.
It was only after you mentioned setting the max-sepdcl-? variable
that it occurred to me that the manual (or at least organization
of these variables with max-sepdcl-? seeming to be some sort
of constant) could use some work. Of course I couldn't make this
suggestion because when I came back, I was busy warding off the
flames you sent my way.
: there's nothing I can do to help
: your situation. I honestly thought you needed to know about those
: variables since you sounded to frustrated, but you also sound a lot more
: frustrated than somebody who wants to have a problem solved would do, and
: so I tried to explain just why they are set so low as to limit your
: experiments with recursion to the point where you feel the need to post
: your negative experiences, beliefs, assumptions, whatever, but not nearly
: enough to read the manual to find better ways experiment with recursion.
Again you demonstrate your deliberate lies about the contents of my
previous post. Erik, don't expect to innaccurately summarize my
post like that without a heated response from me. I may need
help, but I don't need help so badly that I'd put up with your
sh*t. Understand?
: if you actually have something constructive to suggest for GNU Emacs 19.35,
: code or manuals, let me know.
If I have something constructive to suggest for GNU Emacs 19.35 I'll
find someone more worthwhile to tell it to. You Erik are a person
I'd much rather avoid.
: I'll make sure it makes it into the release
: if it is sound advice, i.e., quite unlike the above quoted sentence. it's
: your call, since you have the problems. I couldn't care less what you run
: into if you don't read the manual, but I do care that users out there might
: actually believe there are limitations that can't be relaxed. OK?
Erik you truly are a fool. Read my original posting thoroughly before
shooting off here. You are whining about me giving readers false
impressions while in all reality your deliberate misrepresentation
is doing precisely that. Pot. Kettle. Black.
At least now I know what was lodged in your posterior -- your head.
: #\Erik
: --
: my other car is a cdr
--
Cya,
Ahmed
* ········@Bayou.UH.EDU
| [ more hostile crap]
the "manual" is the Emacs Lisp Reference Manual, not the documentation
strings. it appears that you don't even _know_ of the former, yet become
extremely hostile when I suggest that you would have found the answers you
needed there. FYI, here are the relevant parts of it:
in the node (elisp)Eval:
- Variable: max-lisp-eval-depth
This variable defines the maximum depth allowed in calls to `eval',
`apply', and `funcall' before an error is signaled (with error
message `"Lisp nesting exceeds max-lisp-eval-depth"'). This counts
internal uses of those functions, such as for calling the functions
mentioned in Lisp expressions, and recursive evaluation of
function call arguments and function body forms.
This limit, with the associated error when it is exceeded, is one
way that Lisp avoids infinite recursion on an ill-defined function.
The default value of this variable is 200. If you set it to a
value less than 100, Lisp will reset it to 100 if the given value
is reached.
`max-specpdl-size' provides another limit on nesting. *Note Local
Variables::.
in the node (elisp)Local Variables:
- Variable: max-specpdl-size
This variable defines the limit on the total number of local
variable bindings and `unwind-protect' cleanups (*note Nonlocal
Exits::.) that are allowed before signaling an error (with data
`"Variable binding depth exceeds max-specpdl-size"').
This limit, with the associated error when it is exceeded, is one
way that Lisp avoids infinite recursion on an ill-defined function.
The default value is 600.
`max-lisp-eval-depth' provides another limit on depth of nesting.
*Note Eval::.
the sources for the Emacs Lisp Reference Manual is found at
prep.ai.mit.edu:/pub/gnu/elisp-manual-19-2.4.2.tar.gz
and at any of the numerous mirrors.
#\Erik
--
my other car is a cdr
Erik Naggum (····@naggum.no) wrote:
: * ········@Bayou.UH.EDU
: | [ more hostile crap]
: the "manual" is the Emacs Lisp Reference Manual, not the documentation
: strings. it appears that you don't even _know_ of the former, yet become
: extremely hostile when I suggest that you would have found the answers you
: needed there. FYI, here are the relevant parts of it:
Again you flaunt your illiteracy for the entire group to witness.
If you are through making a debacle of yourself I shall merely
tell you to re-read my previous post where I stated that I read
the documentation strings *AND* info nodes from within emacs.
I can pull a direct passage out of my text if you so desire.
: in the node (elisp)Eval:
[Snip]
Nice, and while definitely more sizeable than the documentation
strings they don't say anything more than what I already knew
from reading the doc strings.
[Snip]
: #\Erik
: --
: my other car is a cdr
--
Cya,
Ahmed
Last night I had burritos and drank a lot of beer,
And now a funny smell is emanating from my rear.
"I Can't Stop Farting" by the Queers