Re: Need help about octave integration on emacs 24.3

[Li Shuai]

>
> This is the first time I try to ask for help from community instead of
> always trying to solve it by myself or delay the solving. Pretty nice
> experience. I did not expect it to be solved so quickly. Thanks again!
>
> Shuai
> Best
>
> On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 11:55 PM, <help-gnu-emacs-request@gnu.org> wrote:
>
>> Send help-gnu-emacs mailing list submissions to
>>         help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>>         https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-gnu-emacs
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>>         help-gnu-emacs-request@gnu.org
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>>         help-gnu-emacs-owner@gnu.org
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of help-gnu-emacs digest..."
>>
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>>    1. Re: Why is it not possible to use "nil" any more in init
>>       files ? (Alexandre Oberlin)
>>    2. Re: Need help about octave integration on emacs 24.3 (Leo Liu)
>>    3. RE: How to truly unbind global bindings? (Drew Adams)
>>    4. RE: When do you prefer frames instead of windows? (Drew Adams)
>>    5. RE: When do you prefer windows instead of frames? Was: When
>>       do you    prefer frames instead of windows? (Drew Adams)
>>    6. RE: When do you prefer frames instead of windows? (Drew Adams)
>>    7. RE: When do you prefer frames instead of windows? (Drew Adams)
>>    8. RE: When do you prefer frames instead of windows?
>>       (Gian Uberto Lauri)
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 16:07:39 +0100
>> From: "Alexandre Oberlin" <email_via_web@migo.info>
>> To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
>> Subject: Re: Why is it not possible to use "nil" any more in init
>>         files ?
>> Message-ID: <op.xpvyy1fofjdmwo@tournesol>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; delsp=yes
>>
>> Thanks Phillip for your answer.
>>
>> You wrote:
>> >> From my perspective, most people who write
>> > (hated-mode nil)
>> > are likely to be able to work out what is happening, while someone who
>> > accidentally writes
>> > (wanted-mode)
>> > and later
>> > (wanted-mode)
>> > has a more pernicuous problem.
>>
>> So the toggling functions have been broken too!? Anyway I?d say most such
>> users don?t write, they just click/touch.
>>
>> Now do you mean that for emacs developers too, unlearned user mistakes
>> driven interfacing has become the guiding principle? I use *n?x systems
>> because I preferred to learn a few things from the start and then know
>> what happens and get what I want. Now this is more and more difficult as
>> the (supposed) average behaviour of occasional users rules (and constantly
>> changes, as well as its perception by new developers). Users who need to
>> work productively are getting nervous because they don?t have time to
>> spend playing with their configurations at each new release of any piece
>> of software. Breaking backward compatibility had always been a NONO, even
>> at Microsoft.
>>
>> IMHO this "intuitive" paradigm is OK for phones/tablets, at least if some
>> consensus can be found. And we all know that casual users will more and
>> more use phones/tablets, not computers any more. As for the more motivated
>> users, they should rather be helped with some good principles and
>> tutorials, and not the developers adapt to their initial shortcomings.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>>
>> Alexandre
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, 25 Nov 2014 14:50:22 +0100, Phillip Lord
>> <phillip.lord@newcastle.ac.uk> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > Clearly, if the interface has changed it runs the risk of breaking some
>> > statements which were previously fulfilling the programmers intent.
>> > This, of course, is irritating for those affected, but that doesn't make
>> > it wrong.
>> >
>> >> From my perspective, most people who write
>> >
>> > (hated-mode nil)
>> >
>> > are likely to be able to work out what is happening, while someone who
>> > accidentally writes
>> >
>> > (wanted-mode)
>> >
>> > and later
>> >
>> > (wanted-mode)
>> >
>> > has a more pernicuous problem.
>> >
>> > I always used
>> >
>> > (hated-mode 0)
>> >
>> > which seems to be more intuitive than passing nil. Perhaps this is why
>> > the change did not irritate me.
>> >
>> >
>> > Alexandre Oberlin <email_via_web@migo.info> writes:
>> >
>> >> Thanks Stefan for this explanation. So IIUC that trick broke some
>> >> correct
>> >> .emacs in order to magically fix some broken ones?
>> >>
>> >> Alexandre
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Sat, 22 Nov 2014 15:37:04 +0100, Stefan Monnier
>> >> <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>>> I know that departing from proven approaches for no sensible reason
>> >>>> is top
>> >>>> of the art but is there any kind of other rationale to make the thing
>> >>>> not
>> >>>> backward-compatible?
>> >>>
>> >>> Of course, there's a reason: All minor modes since Emacs-23 (IIRC)
>> >>> should turn themselves ON when called with a nil argument, so you
>> don't
>> >>> need turn-on-FOO-mode and you can just say:
>> >>>
>> >>>    (add-hook 'bar-mode-hook 'foo-mode)
>> >>>
>> >>> The better part of this incompatible change is that it silently
>> *fixed*
>> >>> many people's .emacs since many people already used:
>> >>>
>> >>>    (add-hook 'bar-mode-hook 'foo-mode)
>> >>>
>> >>> without realizing that this could actually turn the mode OFF in
>> >>> some cases.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>         Stefan
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 23:26:09 +0800
>> From: Leo Liu <sdl.web@gmail.com>
>> To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
>> Subject: Re: Need help about octave integration on emacs 24.3
>> Message-ID: <87lhmzl2su.fsf@gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain
>>
>> On 2014-11-25 09:12 -0500, Stefan Monnier wrote:
>> > It is: there's an autoload of the `octave-mode' function which fetches
>> > the function from `octave-mod'.  So you either have to overwrite it with
>> > your own autoload, or you can simply (load "octave") which will
>> > overwrite the autoload with the actual function.
>>
>> Indeed. In other words put (require 'octave) in your init file.
>>
>> Leo
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 3
>> Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 07:43:29 -0800 (PST)
>> From: Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com>
>> To: Alexander Shukaev <haroogan@gmail.com>, help-gnu-emacs
>>         <help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org>
>> Subject: RE: How to truly unbind global bindings?
>> Message-ID: <c2d9b801-f3c8-4c2f-912b-e6b4ceca5019@default>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>>
>> > The answer was:
>> > (use-global-map (make-sparse-keymap))
>>
>> Why do you want to do this?  (Doesn't sound advisable, to me.)
>>
>> Perhaps if you describe your use case/scenario, people will
>> have something useful to suggest.  I cannot imagine why anyone
>> would try to replace the `global-map' with a new, sparse keymap.
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 4
>> Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 07:46:19 -0800 (PST)
>> From: Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com>
>> To: Gian Uberto Lauri <saint@eng.it>
>> Cc: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org, Raffaele Ricciardi <rfflrccrd@gmail.com>
>> Subject: RE: When do you prefer frames instead of windows?
>> Message-ID: <db3cc1ca-53b7-472d-ad8c-258e97d1650f@default>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>>
>> >  > I would ask an opposite question: IF you could use Emacs frames
>> >  > as easily as you can use Emacs windows, in what scenarios would
>> >  > you prefer using Emacs windows, and why?
>> >
>> > ...mail reading, sql interaction and when working on two parts of
>> > the same file or two files with a macro...
>> >
>> > If the frames could really be used like windows, then, it could be
>> > that I would be comfortable with separate frames.
>>
>> That was the question.  "IF you could use frames as easily as you
>> can use Emacs windows..."  I certainly agree that currently you
>> cannot, especially with just vanilla Emacs.  But if you could...
>>
>> > create several WindowMaker application icons with a single Emacs
>> > instance, and using a different image for each application icon.
>>
>> That sounds like something that would pertain only to certain
>> platforms, since different platforms have different notions of
>> "icon" etc.  But the ability you mention sounds like it might
>> be useful.
>>
>> > This was nice because that let me associate a certain frame with a
>> > certain workspace (i.e. e-mail on workspace 1 and db-interaction on
>> > workspace 6) and use a click on the application icon to jump to that
>> > workspace.
>>
>> FYI, you can use bookmarks to similar effect.  With Bookmark+ you
>> can just jump to this or that desktop bookmark, to change between
>> Emacs "workspaces", as defined by desktop.el.  And it doesn't
>> matter whether you use one frame or 37 frames for such a workspace.
>>
>> http://www.emacswiki.org/BookmarkPlus#DesktopBookmarks
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 5
>> Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 07:46:58 -0800 (PST)
>> From: Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com>
>> To: dieter@duenenhof-wilhelm.de, help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
>> Subject: RE: When do you prefer windows instead of frames? Was: When
>>         do you  prefer frames instead of windows?
>> Message-ID: <c9986f7f-949b-44d5-b62c-6eac8c9d24f5@default>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>>
>> > > I would ask an opposite question: IF you could use Emacs frames
>> > > as easily as you can use Emacs windows, in what scenarios would
>> > > you prefer using Emacs windows, and why?
>> >
>> > For supporting tasks only: Imagine you are starting from a full-screen
>> > window and want to see temporarily a variable definition in a second
>> > window while still hacking away.  The advantage is that window
>> > operations, like C-x } enlarge-window-horizontally,
>> > delete-other-windows-vertically,... operate simultaneously on all
>> > windows.  In such situations it seems to me much more convenient to
>> > use windows than set it up with frames.
>>
>> Again - but what "IF you could use Emacs frames as easily as you
>> can use Emacs windows"?  That's the question.
>>
>> Pop up a *Help* frame instead of a *Help* window to show help.  Hit
>> `C-x 0' to get rid of that frame when you're done.  You probably do
>> not need to resize the frame (e.g., if the frame is automatically
>> fit to the size of just the *Help* text).  But if you do, then use
>> keys to resize it, just as you would for a window.
>>
>> IOW, think past what you can do with a window (resize, move, control
>> where it pops up, etc.) that you think you cannot easily do with a
>> frame now.
>>
>> I certainly agree that if frames are not made as convenient to
>> interact with (i.e., the same kinds of operations you use on
>> windows) then Emacs windows remain useful.  But if Emacs *did*
>> support such operations with frames, out of the box,...
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 6
>> Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 07:47:10 -0800 (PST)
>> From: Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com>
>> To: Ralf Fassel <ralfixx@gmx.de>, help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
>> Subject: RE: When do you prefer frames instead of windows?
>> Message-ID: <4a56056d-6a48-48ea-a80f-448057dce7f4@default>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>>
>> > Single frame for Ediff: A on top, B in the middle, Control at
>> > bottom.  The separate control frame is a nuisance with
>> > focus-follows-mouse, it almost always is out of focus, loses
>> > the cursor, or misbehaves in other fashions...
>>
>> Seems like that is something that could be fixed.  Have you
>> thought about filing a bug report / enhancement request?
>> (`M-x report-emacs-bug')
>>
>> FWIW, I've been using Ediff with separate frames for decades,
>> and I don't have any such problem.  But I don't use
>> `focus-follows-mouse'.
>>
>> In principle, Ediff should play well with separate frames.
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 7
>> Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 07:47:24 -0800 (PST)
>> From: Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com>
>> To: Rainer M Krug <Rainer@krugs.de>
>> Cc: Raffaele Ricciardi <rfflrccrd@gmail.com>, help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org,
>>         Robert Thorpe <rt@robertthorpeconsulting.com>
>> Subject: RE: When do you prefer frames instead of windows?
>> Message-ID: <e48501bd-b9a2-48a9-bd1e-41381fc40a99@default>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>>
>> > > You need to be able to do the same kinds of things with frames
>> > > that you can do with Emacs windows - *from the keyboard* (and with
>> > > a mouse). Including move around incrementally, resize
>> > > incrementally, cycle/choose, tile/split, and so on.
>> > >
>> > > I use Emacs that way, but as I say, this is not provided out of
>> > > the box with `emacs -Q'.  (It should be, IMO.)
>> >
>> > You are throwing teaser around - is your emacs config some=where
>> > on=ine, so that I could take a look at your configuration regarding
>> > frames?
>>
>> I really did not mean it that way.  I'm more interested here in
>> looking at the use cases that people might think really apply to
>> Emacs windows inherently.
>>
>> It's about a thought experiment: WHAT IF you could easily do with
>> frames what you do with windows, using the keyboard (or the mouse)?
>> Would you still see some scenarios where you would prefer to use
>> a window?  If so, what would they be?
>>
>> I do use code that tries to make frames more convenient to use, but
>> that really is beside the point of my question.  What I would like
>> is for vanilla Emacs to provide frame-friendly manipulation.
>>
>> I do understand that Emacs does not have real control over
>> window-manager windows (i.e., frames); it can only request/suggest
>> changes to be made by the window manager.  And different platforms
>> & window managers are different, so it is likely that there would
>> never be a 100% cross-platform solution with the level of control
>> that we have with Emacs windows.
>>
>> Still, I know from my own experience that it is possible to obtain
>> pretty much all of the control I expect, at least across GNU/Linux,
>> UNIX, and MS Windows - I can't vouch for others.
>>
>>
>> [If you do want to try the code I use, just to get an idea of what
>> I mean, look here: http://www.emacswiki.org/OneOnOneEmacs.
>> But again, I'm *not* proposing such code as the solution or even
>> as *a* solution to the problem of easily doing with frames what
>> you do with Emacs windows.  This is code that I use to try to
>> overcome the problem, imperfectly.  That's all.]
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 8
>> Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 16:54:54 +0100
>> From: "Gian Uberto Lauri" <saint@eng.it>
>> To: Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com>
>> Cc: Raffaele Ricciardi <rfflrccrd@gmail.com>, help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org,
>>         Gian Uberto Lauri <saint@eng.it>
>> Subject: RE: When do you prefer frames instead of windows?
>> Message-ID: <21620.42574.322318.854514@mail.eng.it>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>>
>> Drew Adams writes:
>>  > >  > I would ask an opposite question: IF you could use Emacs frames
>>  > >  > as easily as you can use Emacs windows, in what scenarios would
>>  > >  > you prefer using Emacs windows, and why?
>>  > >
>>  > > ...mail reading, sql interaction and when working on two parts of
>>  > > the same file or two files with a macro...
>>  > >
>>  > > If the frames could really be used like windows, then, it could be
>>  > > that I would be comfortable with separate frames.
>>  >
>>  > That was the question.  "IF you could use frames as easily as you
>>  > can use Emacs windows..."  I certainly agree that currently you
>>  > cannot, especially with just vanilla Emacs.  But if you could...
>>
>> Frankly, the answer is "I can't answer until I see it working".
>> But it could be yes, especially if it changes my habits only slightly.
>>
>>  > FYI, you can use bookmarks to similar effect.  With Bookmark+ you
>>  > can just jump to this or that desktop bookmark, to change between
>>  > Emacs "workspaces", as defined by desktop.el.  And it doesn't
>>  > matter whether you use one frame or 37 frames for such a workspace.
>>  >
>>  > http://www.emacswiki.org/BookmarkPlus#DesktopBookmarks
>>
>> I will give it a look, thank you!
>>
>> --
>>  /\           ___                                    Ubuntu: ancient
>> /___/\_|_|\_|__|___Gian Uberto Lauri_____               African word
>>   //--\| | \|  |   Integralista GNUslamico            meaning "I can
>> \/                 coltivatore diretto di software       not install
>>      gi? sistemista a tempo (altrui) perso...                Debian"
>>
>> Warning: gnome-config-daemon considered more dangerous than GOTO
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> help-gnu-emacs mailing list
>> help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
>> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-gnu-emacs
>>
>>
>> End of help-gnu-emacs Digest, Vol 144, Issue 66
>> ***********************************************
>>
>
>