Re: [Axiom-developer] Emacs updates, fixes

[Francois Maltey]

C Y <address@hidden> writes:

> I never intended to restrict ALL keys
I agree, it's the right way, because it's almost impossible 
to lock ALL emacs keys.

So axiom-mode MUST be able to recognize that the cursor is 
outside an input area. 

> > // 2 // 
> > Can you detect the real area (input-command, output-command) ?
> Sorry, I don't understand what you are asking here.
I speak about the buffer-region from one prompt to the next one.

> What should happen if you do that (if I follow you correctly) is
> something like the following:

> You mean the following?
> 
> (1) -> 123
>      (1) 123
> (2) -> 999123
>      (2) 999123
> (3) -> [cursor]

Yes 

> Right now it is not.  I specifically wanted to overwrite old
> input-output combinations, like most modern notebook interfaces.  
> Are you saying you want to be unable to overwrite any input-output
> combination?  

Yes.
I prefer to keep previous commands on the terminal because I really see 
what I (and students) type before the last correction.
So I find the errors more quickly.

> In my experience that usually leads to messy workspaces. 
> The commands are present in the history if you wish to recall them - is
> something more needed?

> What do you mean by "real input?"  (1) is gone, except perhaps
> somewhere in Axiom's memory.  Why do you want to view it again?  

It's nice to see it always because it's perhaps somewhere in
Axiom's memory.
So I find the bugs of my students if I see the history.

With maple my students do :
 k := 3 ;
 [q[k] $ k=1..4] ; 
Maple gives an error, and I find it much more quickly 
if I see the old line k := 3.

> The whole point of being able to re-evaluate old inputs, in my view, is to
> overwrite them.  Otherwise, why not use the new input prompt at the
> end?
> 
> I'm not sure how to capture a string from the buffer and put it in a
> variable - is "the-string 1+23" a way to do this?  

(buffer-substring 1 122) get the beginning of the buffer.
(setq var (buffer-substring 1 122))

> Yes, that might be a way to do it, but personally I prefer NOT to have
> that behavior.  I might be able to work out something as an option, but
> can I ask why you want this?

I understand your point of view.

If you want short workspace, it's also possible to hide only the output
with a delete-region, and put the substring of the deleted region 
in the prompt with put-text-property. And get it back again with a
(insert (get-text-property...)) if the user wants to make it visible again.

I use maple too often and I disapprove interfaces with re-evaluate.

And for my use I prefer buffer where nothing can be change
after the computation, as a typewriter.

> Yes, that might be a way to do it, but personally I prefer NOT to have
> that behavior.

I accept your point of view, but try to keep the _possibility_ to 
have an axiom-mode where re-evaluate is impossible.
 
> > // 6 //
> > Must I get the same result 
> > with commint-mode / commint-run / axiom and axiom-mode ?
> 
> Um - what were you hoping for?  Do you mean you WANT the same result? 

I have no hope, I only want to know if I can compare
axiom-mode result and comint result in order to understand 
how axiom-mode is working.

You make a really big work.
Continue to send new versions, I try to understand axiom-mode.el 
with the diff command.

Francois