[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [O] Bug: Agenda: Invalid Function 4 [8.3.4 (release_8.3.4-702-gcd47a

From: Nick Dokos
Subject: Re: [O] Bug: Agenda: Invalid Function 4 [8.3.4 (release_8.3.4-702-gcd47ab @ ~/.emacs.d/packages/org-mode/lisp/)]
Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2016 16:06:38 -0400
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.50 (gnu/linux)

Ian Dunn <address@hidden> writes:

> Remember to cover the basics, that is, what you expected to happen and
> what in fact did happen.  You don't know how to make a good report?  See
>      http://orgmode.org/manual/Feedback.html#Feedback
> Your bug report will be posted to the Org-mode mailing list.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>         For some time now, I've been noticing that org-agenda-redo (the
> 'g' key in the Agenda buffer, since it isn't *exactly* the same) often
> fails with the error "Invalid Function 4".  I looked into this, and
> discovered that it only happened when I used a tag view list with only
> TODO items.  A backtrace showed that the issue was the redo command, and
> I believe I have solved the problem with the following patch:
> diff --git a/lisp/org-agenda.el b/lisp/org-agenda.el
> index e9f3505..2f7241b 100644
> --- a/lisp/org-agenda.el
> +++ b/lisp/org-agenda.el
> @@ -4852,7 +4852,7 @@ The prefix arg TODO-ONLY limits the search to TODO 
> entries."
>        (setq org-agenda-query-string match)
>        (setq org-agenda-redo-command
>           (list 'org-tags-view
> -               org--matcher-tags-todo-only
> +               (list 'quote org--matcher-tags-todo-only)
>                 `(if current-prefix-arg nil ,org-agenda-query-string)))
>        (setq files (org-agenda-files nil 'ifmode)
>           rtnall nil)
> If my patch doesn't work, I at least hope it helps everyone figure out
> the real problem.
> Thank you for your time.

I don't know if the patch is good (it probably is), but the *real*
problem is what's shown by that backtrace you mentioned, so you should
include the backtrace in your bug report (at least in the future).


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]