Re: ScholarLy newbie, running annotate.ly, gets error message

[Urs Liska]

Am 19.10.2015 um 16:53 schrieb David Kastrup:
> Urs Liska <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> Am 19.10.2015 um 16:36 schrieb Urs Liska:
>>> You didn't do anything wrong but stumbled over a stupid bug I didn't
>>> have the time to look into. It seems that at some point I have
>>> reversed the logic of an 'if' statement so it spits out that error
>>> when everything is OK.
>>>
>>> So if the results are what you expect please ignore *this* kind of
>>> error message.
>>>
>>> Urs
>> Ok, for all those who have read that excuse from me lately: This was
>> just one time too much. I *did* look into it and fixed it by moving one
>> closing paren by one line. Oh I love that language ...
> Emacs' scheme-mode does a reasonably good job at making stuff clear with
> indentation (there is even a mode in ELPA that will cycle through
> different indentations when typing TAB just like python-mode does, but
> also maintaining the matching paren count while doing so).
>
> I would not want to edit Scheme code with an editor different from
> Emacs.  That's its home turf, and it shows.

Although different from the standard (as was discussed recently)
Frescobaldi works quite well too here. But it still doesn't prevent
making stupid errors, especially when manipulating things afterwards. In
this case I had to enclose the "error" branch of an if expression in a
(begin), and I managed to close that begin too late, thus including the
"success" branch in the begin. That way the error message printed
regardless of the result of the file-exists? test. Well, pretty original
use of an error message, isn't it? ;-/

>